I'm with you on some levels here, but agin' ya on others. I wholeheartedly agree that all communications between corporations and people impact the brand - mass, consumer interaction, whatever. And all have legal ramifications. Too many specialized fifedoms in most corporations/ad agencies/pr firms/law firms, ect., obscure this concept.
Where I disagree is in the analysis of why FedEx should have at least done something positive with the furniture guy. Competitive advantage isn't always nuts and bolts or stronger boxes. FedEx has competitors. Some are cheaper, some are faster, and some have better boxes. You can find coffee you like better than Starbucks, too.
But FedEx has the brand, and the brand loyalty, that translates to users who don't do a technical analysis of the playing field - they just want to send something to somebody, and want to do it with a carrier they like. FedEx damaged that relationship - and it would have been very easy not to.
I don't claim to have the answers to how FedEx should have tapped into Jose Avila. There are a number of directions that could have gone.
FedEx has the right to not carry Jose as a "hero." That does not excuse their efforts to treat him as a villain. Dropping the "cease and desist" hammer as part of initial contact was bad posture, bad form, and not well-planned.
In many respects, we're making the same case, John. We both see the problems that occur when those with PR sensitivity are shut out of key policy decisions. If you had backed up just a few posts, you'd see I took Google to task for a similar thing, the CNet news freeze.
btw... nice work.
You've been blogrolled.
Gentlemen:
I agree with you both ... as I said, the "cease and desist" approach always strikes me as harsh. And as I mentioned in my link to the Wal-Mart case, it almost ALWAYS leads to more publicity and visibility -- the exact thing the company wanted to avoid.
On the flip side, companies need to come to grips with these situations and how best to handle them. When I worked in the pipeline industry, it was not at all unusual for people to claim all kinds of amazing things in order to get money from the company.
And once you did -- and word got out -- well, Katy bar the door. Then everyone had their hand out. It's tough to tell some folks no when you've told some yes. That's why lawyers always want to hold the line at being nice to anyone.
I don't have all the answers ... it's a difficult issue and will only grow more so. Wait till there are thousands of vlogs out there with people showing exactly what is wrong with their Acme 5500 ...
Commenting by HaloScan
