When I submitted the article “How to lose your customers in three easy steps” to BizCommunity, I never imagined it would have the impact that it did. The point I was stressing is that it’s much easier to lose a customer than it is to make them a loyal fan, and I asked why companies like Shoe City shoot themselves in the proverbial foot.
The fallout
Things definitely blew out of all proportion on this one. There were a lot of angry responses on the social media pages of not only Shoe City and You Magazine, but on various blogs and animal anti-cruelty sites too. Google “Shoe City” and references to the debacle appear on at least the first four pages.
There were apologies all round from Shoe City, You Magazine and LoweBull the agency responsible for creating the ads. There were promises of changes to procedures, donations to animal anti-cruelty; there was even a local celebrity who came out against the ad and turning down presenting engagements as a result. Other advertising and marketing websites and opinion leaders picked up on the issue and continued with the story and 702 even continued the debate in their Adfeature that week.
Here’s the thing. I don’t believe that all publicity is good publicity. Bad publicity can have real implications on your bottom line. While Shoe City and the rest will surely weather this social media storm, it does beg the question – could it all have been avoided?
Did the rest of the campaign really matter?
When I wrote the article I had only seen “the Cat Ad”. You can see the other ads in the series in LoweBull’s apology. While they remind me conceptually of the Mastercard “Priceless” campaigns, I can see that there is light-hearted humour in the other ads and they do speak to awkward everyday situations with which we can all identify. I still believe they lost the plot with the last one though (and yes I do have a sense of humour).
The question is not whether I did my homework (to be fair, the agency name did not appear on the advertisement or I would have), or understood the message of the overarching campaign (because I did understand the intention.) The question should rather be in light of that particular ad – did the rest of the campaign really matter?
The fleeting nature of campaigns and the power of social media
You see the thing is, campaigns come and go. We’re living in a time where everything is fleeting and word of mouth spreads like wildfire. If the message you’re spreading is positive you’re in luck, but if you’ve stepped foul of the public at large, you’re in for a tough time.
Even if you had seen the previous adverts it will still be the one you have in front of you, in that moment, which can and most likely will shape your perception of the organisation going forward. It is that ad’s call to action to which you will or won’t respond.
Celebrities know they are only as good as their last film or last album and so too for organisations. You’re only as good as your last communication. That’s why it is so very important to get it right every time you communicate privately and publicly.
The crux of the matter – the multiplying effect
Believe me I didn’t think that Shoe City was encouraging us to go out and run over cats. The problem that I had with the ad, aside from it being in poor taste, was why would you want to associate your brand with something so horrible?
The other ads were humorous, but people everywhere react to the harming of animals in a very strong manner. Why take the chance with an ad like that which could spark negative sentiment in your customers? If they had left the campaign that one ad short, none of this would have happened.
When questioned by Andy Rice on the 702 interview, on whether or not she felt that the response by Shoe City was proportionate to the reaction on their website, Shoe City marketing director Louise Hamman acceded that although the responses came from only a few angry people when the ad was targeting millions, that they had to take the multiplying effects into account.
She was right. The talk didn’t stop at the Shoe City and You Magazine Facebook sites, it did in fact multiply not just on a local scale but internationally too.
Is your brand strong enough to survive a similar onslaught? Where do we draw the line? Yes we need to be able to laugh at ourselves, and yes we need to push the creative envelope all the time to come up with innovative ways to market our products, but surely we should still practice some logical restraint.
Copyright© 2011 Lindsay Grubb
About the Author
Lindsay Grubb is a passionate communicator. She is the owner of L Communications, a Johannesburg-based marketing and PR consultancy and a freelance writer. She has appeared in print and online media locally and around the world.
She’s in the business of figuring out what it is you’re trying to say and helping you get the right message across to the right audience. Follow her on Twitter and LinkedIn.
