Was it the wrong pr advice, or no pr advice at all that landed the Maclaren company in an invidious backtracking position this week?
After 12 children in the USA had their fingertips cut off when their fingers were trapped in the hinges of the Maclaren pushchair, Maclaren USA said that they will issue kits to parents in the US to safeguard the pushchair.
Their UK company (Maclaren UK) and trading standards Northamptonshire however, insisted that the same action was not necessary for UK consumers. A statement the company had to make a U-turn on and revise a few days later. British parents will now also being issued by “safety kits” for the pushchairs.
Let’s hope it was no advice at all and that there is a pr position available for one of the 2009 pr students.
Or maybe it was a textbook case of press agentry or publicity? One way communication and the company know the best what people (their public) need or want?
A stance that left them with their reputation in tatters and exposed the company’s poor understanding of the importance of safety to all its customers.
I am very curious about the story behind the revised statment, why did they change the original position and who did make it change? I think there was an interesting lobbying process inside company.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, it is clear that PR professionals malfunctioned at first because they failed to response to the incidents occured in USA and made a rash decision(insisting same remedy action was unnecessary in UK). Also, I agree with you that this is a good PR case and it is press agentry.
I totally agree with you. McClaren didn't seem to have a Crisis Communication plan in place. They actually said since most cases happened in the USA, the UK would not need kits. This is reactive PR. Were they waiting for cases to happen in the UK, before they offer safety kits to UK customers? It was foolish, but nevertheless, they realised their mistake. They need to be more pro-active.
ReplyDelete