Gini Dietrich

The Chrysler Tweet: The Take from An Agency Owner

By: Gini Dietrich | March 14, 2011 | 
144

When I was 23, I was a freshly promoted account executive. I had just led a very successful campaign for potato farmers across the country. We created Franklin planners for them so they would not only be organized, but have all of the information they needed for controlling weeds, insects, and fungus in their fields. It was for BASF and it was so far out of my wheelhouse (other than I ate potatoes), it wasn’t easy to pretend I knew what I was doing.

But that campaign deemed my promotion and began my “from the farm to the fork” career. I was added to the Bayer Agriculture account to work on horticulture, having oh so much experience through my potato farmer work.

This was when websites were first coming to fruition so you had to include an address, a toll-free number, and a URL to all printed materials. It was my job to work with a trade magazine to write, design, proof, and print an advertorial. It was a big job – it was costing the client $60,000 for this one little piece.

I worked really hard on the advertorial – I wanted my bosses and the client to know that I deserved that promotion I’d just gotten.

And then the advertorial came out. It was gorgeous! I can still picture it. Heck! It’s probably still in a box somewhere in an old portfolio. I was really proud of myself and I knew I had earned that promotion.

And then my boss walked into my office and said, “Did you call the number on the back of this piece?”

My heart sank. I had not called it. It was a wrong number – I had two of the numbers transposed.

Frantically, I called the magazine (who hadn’t called the number either) and they said they only thing they could do was reprint which, thankfully, was in time before it ran in the publication. But, because they should have caught it too, they were willing to split the cost of reprinting with me.

It was going to be $30,000 to reprint.

I was certain I was going to be fired. Then I was certain they were going to dock my pay to pay for it.

I’ll never forget that feeling of being in my boss’s office, with the client on the phone, telling them both what the solution was. We all agreed it needed to be done and that the client wouldn’t be dinged for it. The conference call ended and I meekly said, “So what do you want me to do?”

She said, and I’ll never forget this, “You’ve done exactly what you should have done. We’ll eat this cost and I can guarantee you’ll never make this mistake again.”

She was right. I never have.

Owning An Agency

My 24-year-old, AE self is what I think about when clients get mad at someone on my team and ask for them to be removed from their account. It doesn’t happen often, but it has happened a few times. Clients have relationships with agencies and, sometimes, the person or people on the account, no matter how much or how little experience they have, just don’t jive.

I’ve fired only one person because a client asked her off an account. But I did it because he was the third client to ask her off an account and I realized it wasn’t the clients, it was her.

Sure, we all make mistakes and sometimes the relationship doesn’t work, but I’ve never had a client tell me we had to fire someone in order to keep the account. If we did have a client who demanded that, we’d resign the account. I tend to get overly protective of my team even if, sometimes, they deserve what the client is asking.

But I also believe a client doesn’t run my agency. I do.

Enter Chrysler

This is what I thought about when I read about the fateful F bomb tweet from a New Media Strategies employee on behalf of Chrysler last week.

When I heard the NMS employee was fired, my first reaction was, “Oh no! A client doesn’t get to determine whether or not an agency fires an employee.”

Plus, it definitely seems like  a mistake. How many of you have accidentally tweeted from two accounts? I don’t  personally manage more than my own account, but I know it happens. Heck! I’ve seen it happen. It’s a mistake. Should the person be using the F word in a tweet, no matter which account? No. Was it a mistake? Yes.

Then, as I began to dig into it some more, it began to look as though Chrysler didn’t demand it (maybe more suggested it) and NMS took the initiative on their own. Likely because they were afraid of being fired.

But then Chrysler came out and said they didn’t ask that the employee be fired, but they had made the decision to fire the agency.

My Take

More and more information is coming out about this. And we may never know the full story. We don’t know if the employee was on thin ice. Maybe the agency was on thin ice. Or perhaps Chrysler just overreacted.

The bigger issue, though, is that the agency is tweeting for Chrysler. Why aren’t they managing that one piece of their social media in-house?

They seem to have not missed a beat in their Twitter stream (even tweeting from SXSW this past weekend) so maybe they learned their lesson. And I’d be willing to bet that employee never makes that same mistake again. It’s too bad he/she had to learn the lesson by being fired.

About Gini Dietrich


Gini Dietrich is the founder and CEO of Arment Dietrich, an integrated marketing communications firm. She is the author of Spin Sucks, co-author of Marketing in the Round, and co-host of Inside PR. She also is the lead blogger at Spin Sucks and is the founder of Spin Sucks Pro.

Spin Sucks in Your Inbox

144 responses to “The Chrysler Tweet: The Take from An Agency Owner”

  1. KenMueller says:

    I really like your take on this one, particularly the part about who’s doing the Tweeting. Though I don’t think they are alone in terms of the big auto makers. I know that Scott Monty “sometimes” tweets from the main Ford account, I believe an agency does most of the other tweets.

    Additionally, if an agency is responsible for Chrysler’s tweets, I assume they are also responsible for growing the account. I find it surprising they only have about 7,600 followers. I know small local businesses with far more!

  2. ginidietrich says:

    @KenMueller I guess, if the agency is going to tweet for the business, it should say so in the profile. And I agree, they should be growing the account with the right followers.

  3. KenMueller says:

    @ginidietrich I honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen a profile that said the agency was doing the tweeting. And I know quite a few examples where that should be the case.

  4. bar2cci says:

    Nice post, Gini. What I take from this whole thing is that Chrysler should’ve been managing their own account from the start. Too busy? Not enough resources? I doubt that. The only thing that has been exposed is a lack of transparency. And with social media, that’s probably the biggest blow to a brand…. not F-bombs.

    (ps. love your Farm to Fork campaign)  

  5. TorontoLouise says:

    Hi Gini, I think if you’ve been in this business long enough you’ve experienced that heart-pounding chill surge through your stomach as you realize you’ve made one of those horrible, potentially relationship-ending mistakes and it’s your responsibility even though multiple sets of eyes reviewed the text in question. And in most cases, they happen as a result of frantic deadlines and last-minute changes rather than carelessness. And in most cases, profuse apologies are made to the client, the employee is reminded that the devil is in the details, everyone goes out for drinks and a mistake like that is never made again.

    But some mistakes are preventable and, while we don’t have all the info, this one seems suspect. Managing multiple Twitter accounts is tough and the only way to do it is to re-read each and every Tweet to make sure you’re sending it from the right account, something that’s even tougher when you’re on the move using mobile. However, when you’re working for an agency, I think you also have a responsibility to keep your personal Twitter account “clean” and free of anything that might be considered offensive to a client. To me, this tweet would also have been inappropriate from the personal account of someone who works on the Chrysler business.

    The key to all of this is context – a domestic auto manufacturer struggling to rebound from a recession and find relevance with no room for errors, the expectations of social media agencies to always be “on”, the question of who should control the official Twitter account, the current relationship between the client and agency (was it already strained?) the employee’s assumed frustration with traffic (maybe he was late for a meeting) and the employee’s history with the organization (was this the last straw in a string of less public mistakes?).

  6. davevandewalle says:

    I applaud Chrysler for decisive leadership. They did exactly what they should have done, IMHO.

  7. patrickreyes says:

    Gini, I love the question that you posed at the end. I personally think companies should be integrating the social tools in all aspects of there business. This includes interacting with consumers and not having an agency do it for them. Chrysler knows its business and personality and be in a position, organizationally, to do so.

    Coming from GM, I know this isn’t the case and agencies are brought on (Big Fuel for GM) to handle social media for them. I’ve always disagreed with this strategy. The company itself should be handling interaction. I can understand an agency being brought on to consult and educate (like Arment Dietrich) in order to equip company to be able to join the conversation.

  8. patrickreyes says:

    @davevandewalle I’m with you Dave!

  9. DarenWms says:

    Gini, I think the key, which you and several of the commenters touched on, is the source of the Tweet. I’ve written many a talking point, speech or even quotes for a press release that appeared under a client’s name, but social media is different. It should be authentic. People don’t follow celebs, athletes or even companies expecting to read the words/thoughts of a PR account exec. What’s the point?

    Daren

    P.S. I remember that BASF campaign 🙂

  10. Nylons says:

    I think it was Charlene Li, in her book Groundswell, who urges her readers to accept the fact that, when you make your way into the uncharted waters of social, ‘mistakes WILL happen.’ We refer to that all the time in our discussions with clients. They expect that social will change everything and be the magic elixir for their business. At the very same time they want to think of it like they have thought about everything they’ve ever done on the marketing side of their business — messaging that is ‘done’, edited, polished and perfect. Unfortunately the thing about social that makes it so intriguing is it’s humanity. And humanity is never done, polished or perfect. People come with flaws. Conversations and engagement come with people. People are messy. We have to get better at taking the good with the bad if we want to keep moving the needle forward. No one meant to embarrass Chrysler. No one meant to offend people. In fact, there’s probably a funny tv spot in there if their people got at all creative.

    Anyway, great piece Gini.

  11. KratzPR says:

    I really like this post Gini, I love how you connected your own past experiences to what is going on today. As a young entrepreneurial leader and former soccer captain I always look at leadership. I totally agree with you that one mistake shouldn’t result in a firing or drastic reactions. We all make mistakes and this one could happen to anybody.

    Its tough to judge Chrysler though because of the unknown background and gravity of the situation. You’re absolutely right that there may be pre-existing info that we are unaware of, and the burden of reacting in real-time may have spurned the big decision from Chrysler whether it was the right one or not. Either way, I applaud Chrysler for acting quickly.

    Its interesting to see the precedent that this has on other situations. The gold standard for Twitter crisis response is still Red Cross, IMO.

  12. Mistakes happen, sometime it’s a wrong number, other times an engineer decides 0-joints will hold on a booster rocket for the space shuttle. What really matters is the end result.

    Your boss was smart Gini, she realized you learned a great lesson, managed expectations with the client and you survived to fight another day. She could have fired you and hired a new AE who would have made the same mistake a month latter, she kept you and as you said you learned your lesson.

    Often we overblow the consequences of some actions, and sometimes we really underestimate them. The tricky part in accessing the impact (either in $ or human lives).

  13. jgwhitt says:

    I loved this post! We’ve all had those times when our stomachs drop realizing we have made a potentially serious mistake. It’s great to hear that your boss showed you some mercy. Any PR pro worth her/his salt would not make these kind of mistakes twice and it is refreshing to hear examples of those who realize this.

    Further to your other point, I was working at an agency for one of the large German brands a couple of years ago and we were advising them on social media. Although we had an in-house presence at their offices in Germany, we still advised them to get someone to do it internally. They did and now they have one of the best b2b social media programs I have seen. I am now on the corporate side myself and would only ask my agencies to help in rare cases. I think the bigger mistake was Chrysler’s. Yes, the f-bomb earned them and the agency some bad publicity but having their agency so involved in their social media activities calls their authenticity into question.

  14. Makkansson says:

    One question that comes to my mind is this: is it possible that the person who wrote the Tweet merely used ‘common’ language [for this generation] and didn’t see the ‘F’ word as something unusual?

    I think taht we may have an age/generation-gap here?

    I’m 48 and strongly dislike to use foul language, however, what is foul language today?

    I’d love to hear your thoughts about this!

  15. jgwhitt says:

    @Makkansson I’m closer to that younger age group and think foul language is still foul. I am always, 100 percent unimpressed by foul language and I am certain I am not alone. When I hear someone use bad language, it makes me think: uncouth, uneducated, cannot find a more intelligent way to express his/her ideas. I favor a return to decency in our language.

  16. a_greenwood says:

    Your anecdote reminds me of a similar printing job I managed.–It was pulped because of certain questionable photo choices and one ridiculous typo. I’ve never been so nauseated in my life as when I saw that piece. My boss didn’t fire me, but I knew he wasn’t happy for some time afterward…

  17. timjahn says:

    I’ve never understood the censoring of fowl language in general. When we watch broadcast television and somebody swears, it’s bleeped out. Except it’s not ENTIRELY bleeped out. The slight beginning and end of the word are still spoked. Kinda like the way we type it.

    F**k.

    In both the spoken word and written text versions of the swear word above, everybody knows exactly what is meant. There is no question which four letter F word I “meant” to use above. Yet we still “censor” it on television and in written text.

    If there is little to NO doubt as to what word is meant to be used, why even pretend to hide it? To be “proper”?

    Bullshit.

  18. patrickreyes says:

    @timjahn Tim, I would respectfully disagree with you. I personally don’t think profanity has any place in the language of a brand or brand communication. The fact that it is on TV now is because we’ve “let things slide” and TV today (as an example) is far more lax in letting other words be ok for air and censorship of it becomes less and less.

  19. timjahn says:

    @patrickreyes You don’t preach the idea of being authentic and brands having personality instead of just being logos then, do you?

  20. patrickreyes says:

    @timjahn I definitely preach authenticity for brands and having a personality. I just personally feel the use of profanity to do so is unnecessary.

  21. faybiz says:

    great lesson learned story G – thanks!

  22. timjahn says:

    @patrickreyes I think we can both agree there are brands and organizations that profanity has a place in the language of. There’s a whole spectrum there and whether you and I personally like it or not, profanity has a place.

  23. timjahn says:

    @ginidietrich @KenMueller I don’t think the general public really cares about who’s tweeting for the brand/business, except for “social media consultants”.

    Joe Schome doesn’t care whether it’s intern Sally or SVP Mark talking to him on the Brand X Facebook page. Or on the Brand X Twitter account.

    Makes for great blog posts but I’m not sure certain consumer groups pay attention to that whole idea.

    My four cents. 😉

  24. patrickreyes says:

    @timjahn I can’t agree with you on that. I choose not to use profanity in any situation, whether personally or professionally and don’t feel it has a place anywhere. Am I in the minority, probably, but that is just my belief.

  25. timjahn says:

    @patrickreyes Interesting. So you don’t think there’s a single brand in the entire spectrum of the world of business that profanity would fit with?

    We can agree to disagree.

  26. patrickreyes says:

    @timjahn My sentiments exactly. Very enjoyable dialogue with you!

  27. timjahn says:

    @patrickreyes Likewise. 🙂

  28. ryanknapp says:

    @jgwhitt @Makkansson I’d disagree. What inherently makes a word ‘foul’? The connotation given to that word and the stigma that it has. While I might agree with what you said, the way you present it puts you on a pretty high horse. Some of the smartest PhD’s I know swear all the time, while some of the ‘uneducated’ people don’t.

    Swearing is a personal choice. How we chose to use and manipulate language to communicate is up to us. What is okay to one person is not okay to someone else and that should be respected. There are also certain times and places where it’s socially acceptable to swear and others where it not.

    I swear. A lot. However, I know when it is socially appropriate to do so and when it is not. It’s how I choose to use language.

    You have the right to interpret my swearing in any way you wish, but I’d caution you to try to advocate a ‘return to decency’ simply because no one has the right to tell me how I can use language to communicate.

    Swearing actually serves very important social functions. It shows solidarity in groups, belonging and is often imitated by people who are admire someone in a more powerful social position.

  29. […] Gini Dietrich and others have already weighed in on this issue, but I have my own take that I thought I should share. […]

  30. ryanknapp says:

    @jgwhitt@Makkansson

    I’d disagree. What inherently makes a word ‘foul’? It originated in unwritten languages where words where thought to be ‘magic’ and saying the word would bring harm to the person who used it or about the topic of the conversation.

    The way you present it puts you on a pretty high horse. Some of the smartest PhD’s I know swear all the time, while some of the more ‘uneducated’ people don’t. Be careful how you tie education into the ability to use language, it’s not as clear as you may think.

    Swearing is a personal choice. How we chose to use and manipulate language to communicate is up to us. What is okay to one person is not okay to someone else and that should be respected. There are also certain times and places where it’s socially acceptable to swear and others where it not.

    I swear. A lot. However, I understand when it is socially appropriate to do so and when it is not.

    You have the right to interpret my swearing in any way you wish, but I’d caution you to try to advocate a ‘return to decency’. No one has the right to tell me how I can use language to communicate.

    Swearing actually serves very important social functions. It shows solidarity in groups, belonging and is often imitated by people who are admire someone in a more powerful social position.

  31. 3HatsComm says:

    I like your story of lessons learned. Mine from the design side is always, always have clients initial the proof before it goes to print, clear they are responsible for final review. Anyway good discussion here about whether or not the tweets should be in house and if not, should that be disclosed. Good stuff. Because we don’t know all the particulars and probably never will, it’s unsure to me if this was an error sent from the wrong account or miscalculation by the now fired tweeter. Reading the thoughts from @Makkansson about audience and language; then the great exchange between @timjahn and @patrickreyes I just wonder.

    Chrysler is in the midst of a rebranding and have selected to make Detroit, the good and bad and misperceptions, part of its message. I discussed the SuperBowl ad with @jennwhinnem that I liked the edgy, pro-Americana of the spot.. sort of an understated, powerful message and they opted for music and pitchman Eminem, who is 1) a product of the tough side of Detroit and 2) one of the most profane rappers out there. In that context, if they were going for a younger, edgier, Eminem-loving following I am not sure the tweet was 100% bad. What if it had been censored like Tim said, “effing” drive or “f***ing” drive; would that mitigate some of the backlash? Does the fact that it was a tweet and not a full-page ad in USA Today, does the medium change what messages are allowed? IDK any of that, just speculating.

    Then of course you need to consider the market you have, other key shareholders and publics like investors and board members, employees, etc. who would not appreciate the Chrysler brand being associated with such profanity. I use some profanity in my posts for humor, because it’s part of my personality, and b/c it’s MY business and I’ll represent it my way; if someone doesn’t like that I used the full spelling of b.s. in a post, I don’t sweat it. But then I’d not make that decision for a client, probably advise them against it as they’d offend too many, it’d be more trouble than it’s worth. FWIW.

  32. jennwhinnem says:

    I would like to meet the person who hasn’t done this, but not work with them or hire them. It’s so much better to get that first mistake out of the way!

    That said, every single mistake I’ve made in my comms career haunts me. Fortunately there’s not THAT many of them.

  33. timjahn says:

    @ryanknapp @jgwhitt @Makkansson Great points Ryan!

  34. ginidietrich says:

    @timjahn @KenMueller I’m not sure I agree, Tim. If the general public thinks they’re tweeting with the company and then find out it’s really the PR firm, their trust is broken. No one wants the middle man. They want to go straight to the source…and they expect it. If, however, you are transparent about who is tweeting and trust is built that way, they don’t care if it’s the company or agency, as long as they’re being heard.

  35. ginidietrich says:

    @bar2cci I looked this morning to be sure it doesn’t say who’s tweeting and it doesn’t say it. So I’m with you…that is the biggest blow to their brand.

  36. ginidietrich says:

    @TorontoLouise I agree with you that tweets should be kept clean. I know we throw around the F bomb internally here, but we never say it in front of clients or online. It’s enough that I use F bomb here…makes me pretty uncomfortable. 🙂

    BTW…it’s awesome seeing you here! How are you?!?

  37. ginidietrich says:

    @patrickreyes @davevandewalle And I disagree. Sure it’s decisive, but isn’t everyone entitled to a mistake?

  38. patrickreyes says:

    @ginidietrich @davevandewalle Mistakes happen and I get that, however, in this case, there does need to be accountability. NMS was representing Chrysler (that is another topic being addressed here), a brand that received a lot of conversation on the Super Bowl ad. This is different from the experience you had as an AE. You saw the error and made every effort to correct it before anything was released to the public.

    In today’s world (Now Revolution…great book btw), things happen in real time that we can’t take back once we hit the ENTER button. It makes it even more important that we stop and think (even for a few seconds) before tweeting so mistakes like this don’t happen.

  39. Lisa Gerber says:

    This is the social media gaffe (flavor) of the week and the firestorm is always in the reaction. Owning up to the mistake is the best way to diffuse the situation. Then we’d all be here talking about how wonderful Chrysler is. and the agency. Your story illustrates it perfectly and I am betting most of us know that feeling well. The first reaction is to find someone to whom you can’t point a finger, and then, the realization (hopefully) hits that you you have to step up and take accountability yourself.

    This may be one of those situations where they reacted too quickly. Or perhaps as you suggest, there were extenuating circumstances and the agency was on their way out the door anyway.

  40. Lisa Gerber says:

    This is the social media gaffe (flavor) of the week and the firestorm is always in the reaction. Owning up to the mistake is the best way to diffuse the situation. Then we’d all be here talking about how wonderful Chrysler is. and the agency. Your story illustrates it perfectly and I am betting most of us know that feeling well. The first reaction is to find someone to whom you can’t point a finger, and then, the realization (hopefully) hits that you you have to step up and take accountability yourself.

    This may be one of those situations where they reacted too quickly. Or perhaps as you suggest, there were extenuating circumstances and the agency was on their way out the door anyway.

  41. Lisa Gerber says:

    This is the social media gaffe (flavor) of the week and the firestorm is always in the reaction. Owning up to the mistake is the best way to diffuse the situation. Then we’d all be here talking about how wonderful Chrysler is. and the agency. Your story illustrates it perfectly and I am betting most of us know that feeling well. The first reaction is to find someone to whom you can’t point a finger, and then, the realization (hopefully) hits that you you have to step up and take accountability yourself.

    This may be one of those situations where they reacted too quickly. Or perhaps as you suggest, there were extenuating circumstances and the agency was on their way out the door anyway.

  42. jennwhinnem says:

    @ginidietrich @timjahn @KenMueller Can I get an ‘amen.’ I think the ‘general public’ may not articulate their disappointment with having a middle man the same way a social media consultant would, but the disappointment is there. Just ask Hugh Jackman fans!

    Gini advocates for transparency…if you’re going to fake it, be honest about it (quoting my buddy @3HatsComm here). That’s the right way to go.

  43. martinwaxman says:

    @ginidietrich @TorontoLouise The thing I find intriguing about this are all various communications points the story touches on: use of language, taking responsibility, supporting your staff and above all good judgment. I agree the errant tweeter shouldn’t have been fired. However, I think the agency should have offered to resign.

  44. timjahn says:

    @ginidietrich @KenMueller Agreed on the trust issue, Gini. Nobody likes to be lied to, nor have to deal with unnecessary middle men. And you’re right about being transparent, as that goes directly along with the trust.

  45. KenMueller says:

    @timjahn @ginidietrich In general the public doesn’t care…until they find out. Transparency and authenticity are key, and these sorts of things are less likely to happen if you keep it in house.

  46. jgwhitt says:

    @ryanknapp @MakkanssonGreat response – it is great to hear the other side. I was actually thinking of a very good PhD friend of mine who uses quite a bit of foul language and my comment to him would be that he is in danger of giving the impression he cannot think of anything else more intelligent to say. I love the guy but it’s true.

    I think especially in our profession, we need to be sensitve to the wider audience. We need to assume that that there will be someone out there who will be offended by profanity. We have the potential to turn people off when we use it. If you want to use profanity – fine! I respect your right to do so and would never want to take that away. However, I stand by the statement that we need a ‘return to decency’ in our public dialogue – especially if we do not want to alienate others. If that’s a high horse, so be it – it’s what my mother taught me and I think she is right ;).

  47. barryrsilver says:

    Anyone that has worked in any profession has one or two of those “OMIGOD, I’ve done it.” moments that hopefully we survive. I don’t know anything about NMS but I would assume whoever they had tweeting for Chrysler had experience because I assume Chrysler is a major account. So I ask NMS how is it possible that an experienced employee would “firebomb” drivers in Detroit on behalf of a car manufacturer HQ in Detroit, let alone use profanity publicly? What is broken in the NMS culture that allowed this to happen.?Yes something is broken. To hang it solely on the employee is to manage like an ostrich.

  48. HowieSPM says:

    I think your biggest point here, and btw @Griddy and I are proud of this post’s length and depth, is why does Chrysler not have this in house? Normally the reason this get’s outsourced is due to lack of resources not lack of know how.

    You already know my view of the F-n F-Bomb itself. They need more F-n F-Bombs or they have to fire F-n M&M or remove him from that F-n commercial. Actually after seeing the F-n U of Michigan Fab 5 documentary last night…street cred in F-n Detroit is all about the F-Bomb. So unless they are moving their HQ to say polite Charleston South Carolina….

  49. HowieSPM says:

    @barryrsilver I had mentioned Friday the person was in the car and on their mobile. If using Hootsuite and managing a personal account and a client account like I do this can happen inadvertently. I did it 2 weeks ago. But since my personal account is my business account I am very tame at what I say. I think it was a technology snafu not an intent to use the Chysler account.

  50. HowieSPM says:

    @Lisa Gerber Are you angling for 3 @livefyre points here Lisa! 8) lol

  51. Archibald says:

    My first thoughts upon reading the tweet were (a) awesome and (b) this is absolutely part of a campaign, not a rogue tweet. If they’re hiring Eminem as a pitchman, this is exactly the kind of tweet they SHOULD be writing. I’m also suspicious of everything that happened afterward. When was the last time Chrysler got this much discussion, nineteensixtynever?

    I think the biggest mistake Chrysler made was firing the company. We’ve all had similar thoughts, which is why it was so funny; if they had said, “we genuinely apologize to our autoworkers and anyone who took offense at our previous tweet; we’d have responded sooner, but we had to fill out this accident report,” they’re instant twitter legends. Instead, they respond conservatively when I’d guess that of their consumers likely to be offended by that tweet, 99% aren’t even on twitter and don’t care about it. And if you want the twitter demo, this kind of spineless scapegoating is the quickest way to lose them.

    KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE. Chrysler didn’t.

    Finally, to the good gentleman who finds users of profanity “uncouth, unintelligent, and uneducated,” I respectfully submit that you display those very qualities by invoking this blanket statement, and that using personal taste to define someone else speaks only to an insecurity about possessing those same qualities yourself. Manners and decency are not about using the right words or the correct fork; they’re about making the other person feel comfortable, even if they fail to extend the same courtesy to you. I daresay you’ve done the exact opposite.

    Thanks for these posts and for reading mine.

    Archibald

  52. HowieSPM says:

    @timjahn @patrickreyes Jumping in here. Tim you are correct there are plenty of Brand’s that the Foul Language is part of it’s essence. BUT Patrick is correct. You will never see the new 50 Cent album posters etc with foul language. And we all know that ITunes is filled with clean and explicit versions and Wallmart insists only on Clean Versions to be sold in their store. But Tim you are correct. When Jon Stewart on the Daily Show says F-k and it is bleeped…we know what he said.

  53. barryrsilver says:

    @HowieSPM In their car and on their mobile opens up an entirely different can of worms. Still the proper order is Ready, Aim, Fire (or Type, Read,(pause),Send) . no matter which account is being used. Still goes back (partially) to corporate culture.

  54. HowieSPM says:

    @barryrsilver you are correct Barry. And I also wonder about the age of the person. I have gotten to know quite a few Gen-Yers who blog about how to market to their generation. They brag about short attention spans and rapid fire communication. But this is an Org issue because that doesn’t hold in the work place. When you are 16 yes. But 25 working for a company no.

  55. Lisa Gerber says:

    @HowieSPM EW! why did that happen? hahaha. no not at all!! LOL.

  56. alanbr82 says:

    @patrickreyes @ginidietrich @davevandewalle People make mistakes some big some small, but it should be more about track record. Like Gini’s example there are lessons you will never forget. Generally after an “Oh S@!t” moment that AE will be become much more thorough. A side benefit they will have a loyalty to the agency that forgave the mistake and become great asset in the future.

  57. Lisa Gerber says:

    @HowieSPM there, I removed them, but I maintain my points by adding these two benign comments.

  58. bdorman264 says:

    @HowieSPM @Griddy Can I crash this party? Well said Howie, I mean it’s the freakin’ motor city w/ M&M and Kid Rock as their spokespeople/image. I would expect an f-bomb even from Chrysler.

    Unfortunately, everyone thought Chrysler was hip and edgy…..still too corporate…..and why don’t they work on making a better car………not there yet.

    Too bad they were quick to throw someone under the bus and to no avail. I agree w/ @ginidietrich you better stand behind your employees, unless there was something else going on and this was just the final straw.

  59. MARLdblE says:

    Great story Gini.

    Although I agree there are many ways to look at the issue, ultimately I have to say I believe it’s a matter of personal responsibility. In my opinion this person should have thought about the fact that they are managing multiple twitter accounts before they decided to make their oh so personal tweet public by accident. I think they should have considered that perhaps they lose the right to drop f-bombs via twitter because of their increase exposure. I think all of us social media users need to think before we tweet, retweet, and like. At the end of the day the individual user is control of their actions, reactions and thoughts. In that regard, I feel they should be responsible for them too. 🙂

  60. jelenawoehr says:

    @ginidietrich @KenMueller Agreed. I saw a job listing the other day hiring a social media pro that actually listed clients–I didn’t look, but betcha none of them say “agency managed” on their profiles. That leaves a bad taste in my mouth!

  61. Tom Martin says:

    Gini,

    I cut my teeth on an airline account — “always call the number” was a mantra… in fact, when the res folks answered, we’d just say “it’s the agency” and they’d laugh..I swear I think they posted it somewhere in Res training that you can often expect our ad agency to call you.

    And like you, I too made a serious error early in my career and I think our two bosses must have known each other because the response was the same — it happens, and I’m pretty sure you’ll never do that again… true to form, never have.

    You’re right, probably only two people in the world know the whole story. But I have to say, you just can’t make that mistake. Money can be replaced, rather easily, but reputation once sullied is far more difficult to repair. I so often see agency folks (that I know are also tweeting for brands) and they’re dropping F bombs and all kind of other crude stuff in their public stream… it’s only a matter of time before one of those crude tweets goes out under the wrong identity.

    In fact, I’m surprised agencies and brands for that matter don’t do more to police employee accounts… at least for those folks that have access to the corp accounts.

    Great post…

    tommartin

  62. ginidietrich says:

    @Tom Martin “It’s the agency” makes me laugh! You know, I was thinking about this comment when I was walking to a meeting earlier. I think this goes to a strong social media policy. If NMS had “no F bombs” in their policy, the employee deserved to be fired. If not, well, they’d better now!

  63. ginidietrich says:

    @MARLdblE I agree with being responsible, but I also think it’s a bit over-the-top to fire someone for a mistake any of us could have made. Sure, I would NEVER tweet the F bomb, but we once lost a client because I tweeted that Keanu Reeves is gay (in response to a GF who LOVES him) and the client took it as my being homophobic. I’m not, but that’s what it left him with. So … I guess I took responsibility for that silly tweet in the same way.

  64. ginidietrich says:

    @Archibald I ALMOST included in the blog post that I know some people were going to say this was done on purpose. In fact, when I was doing my research, I asked a few friends what they thought and more than one said exactly what you did. I don’t know…it seems like great lengths to go (firing an agency) for a little <bad> publicity.

  65. ginidietrich says:

    @bdorman264 @HowieSPM @Griddy Bill is back! Bill is back! Bill is back!

    I thought you guys would like the length. When I got to the end of my personal story, I was already at 500 words and I panicked!

  66. ginidietrich says:

    @barryrsilver My guess is the employee was a 20-something who probably WAS frustrated and has no problem tweeting that from (his?) personal account. There are lots and lots and lots of junior people at agencies working on major accounts. When I was at FH, I was put in charge of a $6M account…with only three years experience. You just don’t have enough time in the business, at that point, to know what’s right and wrong. But I suppose that’s why the entire agency was fired the next day. I just think it’s over-the-top.

  67. ginidietrich says:

    @Lisa Gerber I wish I’d thought about this before I wrote the post. You know how this same thing happened to the Red Cross (but it was #tigerblood instead of the F bomb)? Look at how differently that was handled. Stiff corporate vs “oops” we made a mistake.

  68. ginidietrich says:

    @jennwhinnem I just told a really junior PR pro (on Twitter) that if I’d been fired for all the mistakes I’d made, I’d have have 30,000 jobs by now.

  69. ginidietrich says:

    @3HatsComm Although I can’t remember, I’m pretty sure the client DID sign off on the proofs. Doesn’t matter.

    On the Chrysler ads…I hate them. I get giving back to Detroit, but WTH do they have to do with the car? I texted @patrickreyes during the Super Bowl and said, “What was that?!”

  70. ginidietrich says:

    @timjahn @patrickreyes I’ve read this exchange between you two and I agree with Patrick. I think it’s wholeheartedly inappropriate to swear online. We once interviewed a guy for a job here. It was his final interview and he dropped the F bomb six times in his meeting with me. I was so put-off that I couldn’t get past it. BUT. I still think the (guy?) shouldn’t have been fired for tweeting it accidentally from the Chrysler account.

  71. ginidietrich says:

    @a_greenwood Doesn’t thinking about that still make you sick to your stomach?

  72. ginidietrich says:

    @ryanknapp HTFU.

  73. ginidietrich says:

    @jgwhitt This is truly the real issue: Chrysler should be handling the Twitter account in-house. You know…I’d be interested to hear your take on the differences between agency and corporate life. Guest post?

  74. ginidietrich says:

    @johnfalchetto Warren Buffet famously said, “Lose the firm money and I’ll be understanding. Lose the firm reputation and I’ll be ruthless.” I guess Chrysler has the same mindset.

  75. ginidietrich says:

    @KratzPR So let me ask you a question. If you’d made that mistake (and I really believe it was an accident), do you think you should have been fired?

  76. ryanknapp says:

    @ginidietrich you win the internet.

  77. ginidietrich says:

    @Nylons You are SO RIGHT! Wouldn’t it have been awesome (and way better PR) if they’d made fun of themselves?! How fun to work for a company that reacts like that (like the Red Cross) instead of a stuffy old car company trying to reinvent themselves.

    Rat’s patootie.

  78. ginidietrich says:

    @DarenWms Do you remember Deb Dunsford? She gave me the second chance!

  79. ginidietrich says:

    @patrickreyes We actually tweet for one client (even though I fought it really, really hard) and, in the profile, it says who’s tweeting and where they can find us. It’s turned out to work just fine…but I’m with you, it should be taken in-house.

  80. ginidietrich says:

    @ryanknapp HAHAHAHAHA!!

  81. patrickreyes says:

    @ginidietrich @3HatsComm That ad in the long form was less about Chrysler and more about a city coming back. Time will tell if it worked.

  82. barryrsilver says:

    P,lease help me. I’m not getting it. Cursing in public should be avoided at all costs but yes it does happen. I remember my son throwing a deity damn and he didn’t learn it on Sesame Street. The unforgivable is the insult to Detroit drivers on behalf of a car manufacturer .. Then Chrysler tries a make good by firing the agency and the agency tries a make good by firing an employee and no one takes responsibility or apologizes. Any relating to the public going on? How’s the image building going? Mistakes happen. I puked up a piece of customer service just last week but with experience the bells kept ringing and I corrected it within a couple of minutes.No harm done and yes I started with an apology.

  83. ScottMonty says:

    @KenMueller Thanks for the mention, Ken. However, the @Ford account is run entirely by Ford employees.

  84. lgdrew says:

    The sad part of this situation for me, is that this could have been prevented before the tweet was even written.

    After tweeting to the wrong account last year, I downloaded another Twitter app on my phone and moved over my personal account so I would never have to even think about posting to a client account. No issues since.

    @barryrsilver I definitely agree with this! — “Still the proper order is Ready, Aim, Fire (or Type, Read,(pause),Send) . no matter which account is being used.” — It’s easy to vent online but those feelings are usually fleeting; The internet is rather permanent…and in this case – Type, pause, do not send.

  85. bodemuro says:

    Hold on… the screen shot includes the time stamp “about 3 hours ago via web”? Am I reading that right? WEB?!

    I fully understand tweeting from the wrong account on your phone, or on your Hootsuite Dashboard (if you check/uncheck the various wrong box), but ON THE WEB?! How do you “tweet from the wrong account” on web Twitter? Unbelievable.

  86. KratzPR says:

    @ginidietrich @KratzPR If that’s my first mistake, no I guess not… Just to pose another question, do you think the fact that Chrysler has done a lot to build an image that coincides with the rebuilding of Detroit has something to do with their decision, since the tweet went in the direct opposite of their image regardless of the language? Just a thought…

  87. lgdrew says:

    The bad part of this situation for me, is that this could have been prevented before the tweet was even written.

    After tweeting to the wrong account last year, I downloaded another Twitter app on my phone and moved over my personal account so I would never have to even think about posting to a client account. No issues since.

    @barryrsilver I definitely agree with this! — “Still the proper order is Ready, Aim, Fire (or Type, Read,(pause),Send) . no matter which account is being used.” — It’s easy to vent online but those feelings are usually fleeting; The internet is rather permanent…and in this case – Type, pause, do not send.

  88. KenMueller says:

    @ScottMonty @Ford Thanks for weighing in Scott. And I’m awfully glad to hear it. Has this always been the case?I heard someone speak from an agency in our area awhile back and they alluded to the idea that they were doing the tweeting.

  89. […] the US is still discussing what should be the appropriate reaction to the Chrysler tweet. Air France brings an interesting approach to social media. Danny Brown has his rule book, perhaps […]

  90. ginidietrich says:

    @KratzPR EXCEPT. Their image includes Eminem, who isn’t exactly void of foul language.

  91. ginidietrich says:

    @ScottMonty @KenMueller Scott, how the heck did you find this comment buried in here?! He didn’t tag you. I’m curious (and impressed!)!

  92. dariasteigman says:

    @Tom Martin tommartin I agree with you, Tom. I’m not surprised the employee was hired, because the message that tweet sent was that they were clueless about their client–or their client’s audience. It wasn’t a stupid mistake, it was an act of amazing stupidity. I wouldn’t want people that stupid (or immature) working for me, and I’d think twice about hiring an agency that has that caliber of employee.

    You can make a mistake, but you can’t bad-mouth the hand that feeds you and expect to keep getting fed.

  93. dariasteigman says:

    @Tom Martin tommartin I agree with you, Tom. I’m not surprised the employee was fired, because the message that tweet sent was that they were clueless about their client–or their client’s audience. It wasn’t a stupid mistake, it was an act of amazing stupidity. I wouldn’t want people that stupid (or immature) working for me, and I’d think twice about hiring an agency that has that caliber of employee.

    You can make a mistake, but you can’t bad-mouth the hand that feeds you and expect to keep getting fed.

  94. ginidietrich says:

    @lgdrew Really, really, really good idea of having two separate Twitter apps!

  95. ginidietrich says:

    @bodemuro Oh. Crap. I didn’t even notice that. That changes my opinion.

  96. ginidietrich says:

    @barryrsilver Yeah, I guess the difference is you (and me) wouldn’t tweet the F bomb. If I were to counsel Chrysler, I would say there are MUCH better ways to handle this. Look at how the Red Cross handled their stray tweet. The publicity they could have gotten from this would have changed from still corporate to the image they began to build with the Super Bowl commercial.

  97. Keena Lykins says:

    Gini,

    Your post brought back some stomach-churning memories of mistakes past. If I had been fired for each mistake I made, I’d have had 20,000 jobs and probably be cleaning toilets by now. I think it was worse, though, when I had to call a client about a mistake someone on the team made. I felt responsible for it even then.

    Personally, I think Chrysler made a big mistake in firing the agency. The Super Bowl ad was all about the company being tough, grounded, and a little gritty. That persona uses the f-bomb. Just say…

  98. 3HatsComm says:

    @patrickreyes @ginidietrich Agreed.. I suppose it’s about making a parallel with the city’s changes, the American auto industry as a whole and yes, Chrysler. IDK.. by embracing that city, by going for a certain edge and impression of a particular type of Americana I thought it worked, but like so many ads, not sure it’ll make me want to buy one and yet, it reminded me that they’re still out there making cars so that’s something. FWIW.

  99. patrickreyes says:

    @3HatsComm @ginidietrich When they began to air the 30 second ad, I didn’t like it at all. The vehicle became the focus and because I thought the long form was so great (just my opinion) it didn’t make sense to use that template to sell the Chrysler 200.

  100. ginidietrich says:

    @Keena Lykins OMG! You commented on the blog! YAY!! I totally agree with you about when a client calls you about a mistake someone else makes. You do feel responsible. I think the general consensus is just that – you use Eminem in your ads and our brand becomes tough.

  101. 3HatsComm says:

    @ginidietrich @lgdrew Done the same, different Twitter apps for different accounts, just remove as many opportunities to screw up as you can. 😉

  102. 3HatsComm says:

    @patrickreyes @ginidietrich Hadn’t seen a short version, probably would make less sense.

  103. Keena Lykins says:

    @ginidietrich @Keena Lykins I know. Next I may even DM you on Twitter. 🙂

  104. Keena Lykins says:

    @ginidietrich @Keena Lykins I know. Next I may even DM you on Twitter. 🙂

  105. ScottMonty says:

    @ginidietrich @KenMueller I have a hotline from Google’s HQ. 🙂

  106. patrickreyes says:

    @ScottMonty @ginidietrich @KenMueller Mr. Monty is the internet Jedi of Michigan.

  107. ScottMonty says:

    @patrickreyes @ginidietrich @KenMueller Just Michigan? 😉

  108. KratzPR says:

    @ginidietrich damn. you got me!

  109. shanajcpr says:

    Agreed– it can certainly be rough to handle more than one account, and I feel bad for the person who made the mistake. It’s unfortunate they had to be fired. 🙁

  110. patrickreyes says:

    @ScottMonty @ginidietrich @KenMueller If you want it to be global, then you’re going to have to fight Gini for that one!

  111. patrickreyes says:

    @ScottMonty @ginidietrich @KenMueller Mr. Monty is the internet Jedi of Michigan.

  112. lindaforrest says:

    The errant Tweet and Chrysler’s response has got people talking, that’s for sure. Agreed that we all make mistakes, but this was a particularly unfortunate one, given the “Imported from Detroit” campaign that the company had recently launched. Ultimately, this gaffe could be perceived as a boost for the company’s brand, if you subscribe to the theory about any publicity being good publicity…

    We wrote today about how companies can avoid these sorts of mistakes by implementing concise yet effective social media policies; this incident is no excuse to avoid outsourcing your social media activity as it could have just as easily happened to an internal resource. Read more: http://bit.ly/g17B4G

  113. AbbieF says:

    We all have all made mistakes in our careers-my first project here at HMA comes to mind. It had to do with Vanna White and the mattress company she was spokesperson for — to this day I don’t know which one it was. But we owned up to it, made good and moved on. We had the client for several years.

    Difference is back in the good old days, you know, before the Internet, we weren’t in such a hurry to get things done and out the door. We took a little more time to review information. And mistakes were still made. Today’s instant, gotta get it out now, world we live in, means more mistakes are made and they’re made faster.

    Gini, I agree, we may never know exactly what happened here. Whether it was a mistake like Chrysler or Red Cross, or insensitivity like Kenneth Cole and the AFLAC guy, technology gives us great power but with it comes great responsibility. So once again, be careful what you Tweet.

  114. ginidietrich says:

    @AbbieF And…don’t drink and tweet!

  115. ginidietrich says:

    @lindaforrest I hate the “any publicity is good publicity” stance, but you are right that people are talking about them.

  116. ginidietrich says:

    @Keena Lykins Get out! Twitter, too?!

  117. gyrlbanket says:

    As a student I am weary of mistakes like this so it is refreshing to hear your professional perspective. I totally agree that social media should be handled in-house, that is one of the benefits of social media as opposed to traditional media platforms. The blame should not fall on one person here; there are some valuable takeaways for all involved parties (client, agency, and individual).

  118. lindaforrest says:

    @ginidietrich @lindaforrest I’m not a fan either but it did give company execs the opportunity to further drive home their key messages in their latest campaign about their ties to and support for Detroit. Any excuse to reinforce your brand attributes to your marketplace is probably a good thing. And the voice of Chrysler’s brass holds more weight than that of the now fired third-party Tweeter.

  119. […] Dietrich wrote a terrific blog post about the Chrysler tweet and in it, shared one of her early mistakes – and how much she learned […]

  120. Here is the post @jgombita http://tinyurl.com/6avpjxh this post had an agency perspective I found interesting.

  121. HowieSPM says:

    OK everyone pay up. I was right. CBS has now reported the employee did make the mistake I mentioned of running more than one account from his phone and posting to the wrong stream.

    BUT now we have other questions. Chrysler fired the agency. This put 20 people out of work (so the Agency claims). I frame the next question blindly. Should Chrysler have fired the agency. What else was the agency doing for Chrysler? 20 people is a lot. How long has the Agency been working with Chrysler? Was the work good enough and for long enough to prevent the firing? Obviously not. But was it good enough to say Chrysler over reacted?

    Did Groupon fire CPB for the horrible Superbowl Ads? Wasn’t those worse?

  122. Keena Lykins says:

    I’ve been chatting with people about this over the past few days (surprised at how many people are aware of it) and no one has any doubts that Chrysler ordered the employee fired, and then fired the agency when that order blew up in its face. Interestingly, several mentioned a company that used Eminem in its ads should be able to handle an accidental f-bomb.

  123. 3HatsComm says:

    @HowieSPM Since you brought it up, is this the first time the agency has messed up? There may be other things we’ll never know. Was it just the public flub and backlash, and if so how bad has it really hurt Chrysler? Did stock prices dive, sales drop? FWIW even though I didn’t care for (nor hate) the ads, I didn’t leave Groupon, bought a great deal a couple weeks ago. Other than these circles, I just wonder how much this bad PR and SM negatively impacts some brands.

  124. ScottMonty says:

    @HowieSPM For what it’s worth, it’s my understanding that this was the final straw in a strained relationship. Chrysler could have mitigated the damage by waiting to make the announcement, instead of getting it wrapped up in the PR around the errant tweet.

  125. HowieSPM says:

    @ScottMonty Scott! I am so stoked you came here! Wow Gini is a true Supa star! LOL Thanks for the input. Its interesting because it has been seeming to me the kicker here was Chrysler using M&M and being upset over the F-Bomb which has technically put them in a conflicting position. Do they want M&M for street cred or do they want the Pope?

    And thanks @3HatsComm for the always great omment.

    Scott Ford tweets internally correct vs outsourcing that?

  126. ScottMonty says:

    @HowieSPM @3HatsComm They could have avoided the whole thing by blaming the tweet in Eminem. 🙂

    Yes, Ford handles Twitter with Ford staff. We use agency support to help with creation and curation of content on Facebook, but again, we respond personally there as well.

  127. ScottMonty says:

    @HowieSPM@3HatsComm

    They could have avoided the whole thing by blaming the tweet on Eminem. 🙂

    Yes, Ford handles Twitter with Ford staff. We use agency support to help with creation and curation of content on Facebook, but again, we respond personally there as well.

  128. HowieSPM says:

    @ScottMonty @3HatsComm I suspected you did this in house Scott because of your background. I am actually surprised most Fortune 200 companies don’t do all their marketing/advertising in house since they have the money too, but I know it’s not a core competency and why have permanent staff when it can be outsourced. I know from Chris Baccus, ATT does the same. He even responds on twitter directly from their account sometimes. It is good policy.

    That would of been slick blaming M&M! lol Though wonder if @ginidietrich would call that a proper PR move!

    Have a great weekend!

  129. meganbeausang says:

    I have been thinking about this ever since you posted this Gini. On one hand, my thought is, what an idiot – just don’t swear on the internet. Of course, my preferred method of communicating is ripe with expletives and I do suffer from road rage, so I can understand where he is coming from. But on a much deeper level – I think this perpetuates a growing dilemma in the American Workplace – that Corporations are priority one and individuals come in a distant second. From tax structure to legislation to the very treatment of people and customers…Corporate America is allowed to do/act unfairly, without passion, without integrity and without consequence. This agency fired its employee within hours of his tweet. No thought, no compassion, it did not defend him and move on. It does not care that they have thrown him out into an impossible job market. A job market that is made worse in Detroit by THEIR CLIENT! What is really troubling is this client made MANY MANY HUGE mistakes and was ‘forgiven’ by the taxpayer by the tune of $7B. When does the taxpayer (or employee) get an ounce of forgiveness? Thy hypocrisy of this situation is just baffling.

  130. barryrsilver says:

    @meganbeausang Yes, but sometimes we all must concentrate on that which can can control. The world is rife with inequity and I agree that there exists a privileged classs that often acts at will without recourse. Having said that, I feel bad for anyone losing a job in this market. I feel as bad about a professional being unable to distinguish an open forum from a private conversation and by the way, what about all the capable drivers in Detroit?

  131. ginidietrich says:

    @Keena Lykins I’m with you. And you know what it’s like on the agency side. If the client says jump, some of us ask how high. That’s just not a great way to run a business.

  132. ginidietrich says:

    @barryrsilver @meganbeausang I’m pretty sure (having had this same conversation with clients before) that the agency was more afraid of losing the business in this economy. It’s too bad they fired the guy and then got fired, too. That’s why a client will never run our business: I can remove the person from the account, but unless the person is on probation and already close to being fired, a client cannot dictate what we do with our team.

  133. ginidietrich says:

    @ScottMonty @HowieSPM I also heard the agency was on thin ice. I get that, but agree they should have waited. I hope they take the social media in-house now.

  134. […] call B.S. Here’s the thing I think almost everyone’s forgetting – we all make mistakes. And sometimes we even have inadvertent help in our failings. Those T-Rex size errors can cause […]

  135. Twit Happens says:

    […] running multiple accounts and you send a personal message over a business account, (i.e. Chrysler). Twit […]

  136. […] Don’t stare into the lights. Ever been on a stage to face the spotlight? The piercing glare can paralyze and disorient even the most seasoned performers. Take a lesson and keep your field of vision wide. Stay receptive to what’s happening on the stage around you and in the audience. A high level of awareness will help you respond to a snafu with grace and style (think Red Cross, not Chrysler). […]

  137. […] Don’t stare into the lights. Ever been on a stage to face the spotlight? The piercing glare can paralyze and disorient even the most seasoned performers. Take a lesson and keep your field of vision wide. Stay receptive to what’s happening on the stage around you and in the audience. A high level of awareness will help you respond to a snafu with grace and style (think Red Cross, not Chrysler). […]

  138. […] Don’t stare into the lights. Ever been on a stage to face the spotlight? The piercing glare can paralyze and disorient even the most seasoned performers. Take a lesson and keep your field of vision wide. Stay receptive to what’s happening on the stage around you and in the audience. A high level of awareness will help you respond to a snafu with grace and style (think Red Cross, not Chrysler). […]

  139. […] the tweet revealing something unique? Think Arab Spring or Chrysler’s mishandled Detroit driver tweet or the unexpected marketing coup the Red Cross earned for itself and Dogfish Head […]

  140. […] It’s already begun…and the election is still 14 months away. It’s another Chrysler F bomb story, but in the Massachusetts Senate race. A top aide for Scott Brown apparently is behind the […]

  141. […] such as Chrysler, Kenneth Cole, and CelebBoutique have all made the mistake of tweeting something offensive from the […]

  142. […] such as Chrysler, Kenneth Cole, andCelebBoutiquehave all made the mistake of tweeting something offensive from the […]

  143. […] the tweet revealing something unique? Think Arab Spring or Chrysler’s mishandled Detroit driver tweet or the unexpected marketing coup the Red Cross earned for itself and Dogfish Head […]

  144. […] such as Chrysler, Kenneth Cole, and CelebBoutique have all made the mistake of tweeting something offensive from the […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  
Please enter an e-mail address

[postmatic_subscribe_widget]