Burson-Marsteller tried to smear Google, although they claim otherwise. The entirety of the campaign should of had a different goal. Instead of trying to make their competitor look bad, they should of made their client look better. It's a slippery slope whenever a PR agency makes a company look bad. That burns bridges for future partnerships. Burson-Marsteller could have gone the route of offering information about the services that Facebook provides that Google does not.Also, they could've noted the things that Facebook does better than anybody else.
BUT hindsight is 20/20 and instead the PR agency went their own route. As Warren Buffet said once you can lose money, but you can't lose an ounce of your reputation. One bad publicity stunt like that could severely hurt a PR agency. It really surprises me that the PR practitioners couldn't predict this because it's the focal point of their job to make sure people look good!
I'm not sure whether it's ethical to always say who your client is. It may not be a big deal if you're asking general questions. If you're asking bloggers to make another company look bad, than its not fair to the bloggers. It's unfair because the blogger may be asked to endorse a company they don't particularly like. Hypothetically, the blogger could not of liked Facebook and wouldn't want to ruin their competition.
No comments:
Post a Comment