Comments for We're BMB

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Mark Sowerby

Mark Sowerby — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:14:35 +0000

Thanks to everyone for their comments (and apologies for the delay in their appearance on our site) – it’s clear that there are some strong feelings out there and I appreciate the opportunity for open discussion.

Without having access to the precise details of what all parties said to each other – and at what time they were said – it wasn’t my intention to pass judgement on exactly who was at fault and why. However, with a general overview of the situation I wanted to look at things from a communications perspective, examining how Paperchase could have handled things differently once the Twitter conversations took off and what effect this different approach might have had.

I wanted to find something constructive in all this and a way forward. We can’t change the past but we can learn from those mistakes and help people to avoid them in future. In this case, poor communication underpins much of what happened: poor communication between a freelance illustrator and the design agency, poor communication between the agency and Paperchase, poor communication between Paperchase and an aggrieved illustrator and, finally, poor communication with the public. Would this situation have blown-up if communication and proper channels had been better?

It’s my genuine belief that by listening and responding to customers (and suppliers) wherever they are, brands can create better products & services, introduce initiatives that really work and build credibility & loyalty in partnership with the people that matter.

Conversely, as this incident shows, brands should ignore social media at their peril. People (and sometimes lots of them) are talking about brands whether they like it or not and by refusing or delaying interaction it is clearly possible for damage to be done in a short space of time.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Holly

Holly — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:02:45 +0000

Yes, Paperchase continually made themselves out to be victims… and at one point perhaps they were. But the fact is that when HiddenEloise originally contacted them last year, they effectively ignored her claims, knowing full well that she would never be able to afford a lawyer to take them on. At that moment they stopped being victims and became a corporation without integrity. Their conduct when the twitter ‘moberati’ (the people who have eyes and could see that an injustice had taken place) started to make a fuss was to run a smear campaign against both the twitter community and against HiddenEloise, both of whom were later proved to be right. I must say, for people who claim to be getting the hang of using social media, your article has now been seen by a lot of twitterers who won’t take kindly to being called a ‘mob’ when we were just trying to make sure Paperchase did the right thing.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Jessica Twentyman

Jessica Twentyman — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:58:56 +0000

I’m surprised that, as a creative communications company, you’re quite so quick to dismiss the people who raised concerns about this case on Twitter as ‘the moberati’ and ‘a baying mob’. I was one of that mob – a loyal Paperchase customer who regularly purchases their products for their originality and design aesthetic. I had legitimate concerns, which the company failed to address. This unfortunate story is as much about managing customer relationships as it is about protecting a brand’s reputation.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Jared Earle

Jared Earle — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:43:39 +0000

One thing Paperchase could have done is not ignore and fobb-off the artist in the first place. Now that this is a proven case of plagiarism, it’s a little harsh to say Paperchase did all they could; it never had to come to this.

Nothing changes the fact that Hidden Eloise was right all along and without the support of the mob, as you call it, she would be another victim of plagiarism, slapped aside by a large corporation.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Rachel Warden

Rachel Warden — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:17:27 +0000

“In addition, Paperchase may have been able to maximise the fact that they had a significant volume of traffic to its website.”

If you think that, you’re living in cloud cuckoo land. Do you believe that Carter-Ruck gained any new clients from their PR disaster last year? Different context, same outcry. Consumers aren’t idiots.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by James E

James E — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:13:30 +0000

“So what can we learn from this?”

Dont steal other peoples work.

Comment on New technology but the same rules apply. by Hidden Eloise

Hidden Eloise — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:01:47 +0000

Hello there,

This article ignores a surprising number of facts. Also the assumptions made regarding what Paperchase was “legally required” to do are just plain wrong.

Bear hugs,
Hidden Eloise

Comment on Creating a buzz. by jae baker

jae baker — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:12:35 +0000

where are the bumblebee car competitions and how do i enter

Comment on Independent thinking in action. by viagra pharmacy

viagra pharmacy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 07:56:49 +0000

thanks !! very helpful post!

Comment on Child’s Play by forex robot

forex robot — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:36:51 +0000

great post as usual forex robot