Need help with a very sensitive complaint against a massive multinational!

(1409 Posts)
MrsRickman Fri 16-Jul-10 17:58:45

Ok, here goes.
Coca Cola are running a promo via their Dr Pepper brand just now on facebook. It is called 'status takeover' and involves the application putting an embarrassing or funny status on your FB page.
My 14 yo dd participated and I was HORRIFIED to log into FB and see that her status read - 'I watched 2 girls one cup and felt hungry afterwards'. For anyone who doesn't know what this means, please stay ignorant, for those who do, you can imagine how I felt. This was compounded later on when a quick search through dds internet history revealed she had tried to find out what it was for herself. Thankfully, our ISP has a wonderful child filter!!
So, after various emails and phonecalls to CocaCola marketing I have been offered (quite offensively) as way of compensation, a night in a hotel and theatre tickets for the West End. Fat lot of use to me, we live in Glasgow.
So, how do I proceed? ASA? I am absolutely fizzing with rage and disgust, and want a full apology and explanation. CocaCola are saying they use outside marketing teams for different brands and it's outside their jurisdiction. Help!?
angry

Pommymumof3 Sat 21-Jul-12 07:34:51

confused how can that possibly be allowed to happen!
Disgusting!!

Tamlev13 Wed 18-Jul-12 23:30:20

That's quite funny, always funny to look at facecams of people watching it, it's fake so don't fret (shiny poo?).
Oh yeah, kids shouldn't watch and all that blah

And how come it got to over 1000 posts?

How did this thread get resurrected? It's a year old!

johngp Sun 17-Jul-11 17:45:58

Help with a complaint - Can I recommend a small booklet published by Orange the mobile phone company. It is called 'what parents need to know' and the description is: 'The guide to safe and responsible use of mobile phones and the Internet.' I think it is very good - lots of good hints and tips, but no tools for parents and carers to use. My copy is dated 06/10 so it is a year old. I think it ought to be still available. I haven't checked the Orange website.

On page 31 it says: Reporting Abuse: If you see content on the Internet which you believe is illegal or in breach of a website's term and conditions you can report it to the service provider, IWF and/or CEOP.

It continues: What about illegal websites? If you believe a website or images you have encountered to be illegal, you can report it to the IWF:

- email to report@iwf.org.uk
- online at iwf.org.uk

I have started a new thread - 'Children and Technology' - I think parents need more than good guides like the Orange booklet, because of the power of the devices that are available today. Parents need real tools to monitor what their children are doing. Your incident confirms my belief that parents need real tools to protect their children.

Have a look at: How to protect your kids on the Internet

http://help.orange.co.uk/orangeuk/support/personal/232015

johngp

walkinZombie Sun 23-Jan-11 16:20:46

Wow...especially with a 14 year old

NetworkGuy Mon 02-Aug-10 03:54:12

I sent e-mail message to the address you had posted some time before when you were asking MrsR to contact you. You had posted phone number and e-mail, if you recall.

sdia12 Mon 02-Aug-10 00:27:39

No idea how this mumsnet thing works! If you can send to this email: http://safemail.justlikeed.net/e/24f55aac0f526d503e08e9d2115678b3.png

Encrypted in image so I don't get spambots.

NetworkGuy Sat 31-Jul-10 21:00:59

I notice they wiped mentions in their blog of being involved with Dr Pepper (wiped a few months of blog entries out completely).

Not sure if you got my e-mail, sdia12, but I did send a message within an hour of you asking a week back...

sdia12 Thu 29-Jul-10 17:37:52

Personally I blame the agency - they seemed to not want to take the blame, though. Whenever I'd phone up with a clarification, they'd say "talk to Coca-Cola, bye" and hang up. Way to dump the junk on your client!

I called up to clarify if they had been awarded Best Ad Agency fairly recently, and got the same 'telephone slammed down' response.

For being self-acclaimed "experts" in promoting an image, I must say they faffed around terribly at promoting their own.

tokyonambu Wed 28-Jul-10 22:28:46

You can only admire a brand that thinks that The Aristocrats is the basis for a campaign.

LeninGrad Tue 27-Jul-10 17:43:01

Yep, someone should have done their research and questioned and then escalated it, from both orgs.

NetworkGuy Tue 27-Jul-10 17:37:14

I suppose it depends on how many dozen crass comments they had to read, in part, and perhaps it was left to someone new to the marketing department to do the boring bit, who may have felt embarrassed to ask about the 2 girls 1 cup reference, just because it seems 'cool' not to need to ask...

They have had the marketing people criticised as being incompetent for not asking about it, and how "hip" they probably felt they were being to use social networking site but that this has probably been their worst nightmare.

I'd still point the finger very much in the direction of the agency - the Coca-Cola people must have indicated their target audience, and I bet the agency was left to do "the rest", so they came up with the messages... If Coca-Cola came up with the messages, then I'd point the finger at them, after all, the client is always right (and the most an agency might do is point out a possible error, and keep their name well away from the campaign if they felt it was "dodgy").

Every week I hear or see something "out of the ordinary" (ie unknown to me) which may be slang of an offensive kind. Had never heard of a "Chelsea Smile" until this thread. Had never heard of "crack one off" (until I was up late and it was said on Big Brother).

There must be 1001 expressions of varying levels of crudity which we, as individuals, may never have heard.

Regarding 2 girls 1 cup, I had not seen a thread about it on MN, nor did I even know the name, but someone on geeky_stuff enquired about stopping her son from viewing porn via his mobile or the net {sorry, some months ago} and I happened to have seen something on C4 or Five about teenagers, where that clip was described.

The presenter had been told what was in the clip by two teenage (14-15) lads, and I could hardly believe what I was hearing, yet the lads seemed quite unconcerned (presumably having seen other filth, too).

As with the "reactions" clips (about seeing 2G1C) on YouTube, there was (within the TV show) a part when the parents saw it, so we as TV audience could see their reactions.

Don't remember anyone being actually sick, but most of the Mums covered their eyes, and looked ill. The Dads also showed signs of revulsion, but in all cases, it was a massive shock to them that their sons had seen such revolting muck.

So what I'm getting at, is the likelihood (as per a poster's comments much earlier) that perhaps someone young in the agency included it, thinking it "acceptable" to use that line, and the agency had a duty of care to come up with (suitable) goods!

LeninGrad Tue 27-Jul-10 17:11:54

I was chatting to someone on Twitter today and he said Coke signed the updates off. Bizarre that they would do that.

DunktheBear Tue 27-Jul-10 15:14:02

Hello

Coca Cola has sacked the agency that came up with this campaign for them. The agency has been removed from all Coca Cola work across all of its brands.

Http://tinyurl.com/3xeqbdf

It is however worth remembering Coca Cola marketing team signed off e.g. approved all of the content of this campaign. So are they really that blameless?

sdia12 Fri 23-Jul-10 19:26:14

NetworkGuy thanks for your help in info gathering for my piece. Can you pass me your email, cheers

piprabbit Fri 23-Jul-10 19:06:39

doughtnutty I was wondering the same thing. There's often a bit more space in the Sunday papers for pontificating on this sort of thing.

doughnutty Fri 23-Jul-10 19:02:12

Maybe, given the week they've had to realise that there might be a story worth telling, one of the weekend papers might pick it up.

Or am I just naive?

FellatioNelson Fri 23-Jul-10 17:23:32

this is very supportive

Sorry if it's already been linked - getting hard to keep up with what has and hasn't been mentioned on this thread!

Still absolutely stunned by the general apathy in the national press.

NetworkGuy Fri 23-Jul-10 10:56:25

Seen today in comments following a blog entry

" This agency clearly has one tech savy guy, and a room full of cocaine snorting, never-read-a-book, never-learned-a-thing pretty morons writing copy. "

Don't blame me, I'm only the messenger.

Here's a link to the blog entry titled "Dr. Pepper learns about social media boundaries the hard way" (but check the web address - that may have been the original subject line for the entry)

NetworkGuy Fri 23-Jul-10 10:43:59

Oh dear - I am very slow - I had honestly thought that there was nothing to link Dr Pepper with the status messages, but see from the (enlarged) image on a blog that it says 'via Dr Pepper Status Takeover'

I suppose with 500M users, and expecting to reach 1Bn users, FaceBook is almost "unstoppable". They are making money and some advertising agencies seem to love them (along with Twitter, YouTube, etc) for "spreading the word". Happy to avoid any marketing using these social networks, for now at least (why I won't have a business related blog, either).

NetworkGuy Fri 23-Jul-10 10:35:35

From an item in the Observer :The next 400 - "Keep an eye on these shining stars: you'll be seeing a whole lot more of them"

... Dave Bedwood, Lean Mean Fighting Machine, founder ... Oh yes, though for the wrong reasons.

Seems 'The Boss' Tom Bazeley, has been away on holiday this week. Perhaps a very good time to be out of the office!

LeninGrad Fri 23-Jul-10 10:06:36

FYI - Facebook's ClickCEOP app: such welcome news

tokyonambu Fri 23-Jul-10 09:45:39

"I control what my child sees on the internet, just as I would control with whom they interact in real life."

I bet you don't, unless you home school and never let your child take part in any activity for which you are not stood by their side.

Let's take my 14 year old daughter, like MrsP's, who's a Facebook user. She's at school today. It's a small school, but there's still 1000 pupils and a commensurate number of staff. I don't know most of them from Adam, and certainly have no control over them. I carry this risk because the school can be assumed to exercise some due diligence.

This weekend she'll be at an National Youth Orchestra workshop. There'll be a couple of hundred players there, most of them older. I can have no control over what they say and do during the day, but it's a risk I carry because it's vaguely supervised, and because I know my daughter. The same applies, in spades, to the week long residential orchestral course she's going on in a few weeks time.

In all these cases I carry the risk that I am not able to control whom she interacts with because I place some faith in the organisers and in her common sense.

In what way are the NYO or the organisers of a small orchestral course based out of a boarding school in the Home Counties more trustworthy than the Coca Cola corporation when it comes to child protection? Why shouldn't I regard major companies as being reasonably careful not to promote scat porn?

NetworkGuy Thu 22-Jul-10 21:51:41

cattj - check the web address... mine says "child_internet_safety" instead of "_chat" as someone at MNHQ must have taken the decision

(a) to allow more than 1000 posts and
(b) not to keep it in _chat where it would be deleted automatically.

Initially I assumed some people visiting from other websites would not see it, but it seems MNHQ has added a link so it works from chat as well as from childinternet_safety but if you view it from _chat you may get a warning about automatic deletion.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now