PR fail

Vodafone & Twitter: can human error break down the corporate facade?

By now, the @VodafoneUK story which broke on Friday afternoon is, to many of us, well known. However, has this really damaged the reputation of the brand or has it had the adverse affect?

On Monday, @Lakey (Can you see how we’re now using Twitter handles instead of names. Most odd) wrote an interesting post on the story which encouraged Dan, a Vodafone representative, to respond, and fair play to Vodafone for doing so. There is mixed opinion about how well Vodafone handled the aftermath because there is no fixed “process” on dealing with such situations.

However, I believe something really positive has come out of this, which may benefit Vodafone and other organisations embracing social media…

15 savage mistakes commonly made by PR folks

15 savage mistakes made by PR folksAfter reading about the Brody PR fail I thought I’d compile a list
of common issues experienced by journalists when dealing with PR

A good PR makes things easy for journalists. They
coordinate things behind the scenes. They follow up promptly on requests for
further information or interviews. The understand the subject matter
and how the journalist / publication plays a part in communicating news
to a wider audience. And they do not try to pull the wool of your eyes.

A bad PR can be ill-informed, demanding, haughty, deceptive, intrusive, and sometimes plain idiotic.

if you work in PR and want to improve your game then try to avoid any
of the following. Any of these things will harm your personal
reputation, and damage the chances of gaining coverage for your client.

Top ten online PR fails

A number of brands have fallen foul of social media over the last few years, either due to lack of understanding of how information spreads online, or by attempting to manipulate the system and getting caught out.

I’ve listed ten examples of companies who have suffered PR nightmares online, in most cases the bad publicity has come via social media sites…

Kodak risks major PR fail after purge of the free

Kodak risks major PR fail after Kodak Gallery purgeKodak has done the unthinkable by alienating vast swathes of long-term customers by deleting pictures stored in the Kodak Picture Gallery.

The Gallery stores ‘billions of photos’ for it’s 75m members, and the costs associated with running this part of its business forced Kodak to change its terms and conditions

It now requires users make at least one ‘annual nominal purchase’, otherwise their pictures will be deleted – unless an annual fee of either $4.99 (for sub-2GB accounts) or $19.99 (for heavier users) will be charged. 

Kodak says it has communicated this via email ‘over a period of months’ (it started to message users almost a year ago), but nevertheless, many users have been shocked by the decision to delete their pictures. Certainly it’s not something that sits well in the Flickr age.