When to Blame the Agency and When to Blame the Client
The recent online outcry about the Motrin advert has shown just how powerful a tool social media can be. For anyone who hasn’t heard the story, it’s about the pharmaceutical company upsetting mothers everywhere with an advert that was deemed condescending by the very mothers the company was targeting. You can read more about it here.
It comes after the furore over the poorly thought out press release issued by the BackUp Shotgun Rack company that took advantage of the Jennifer Hudson tragedy. These two events and others like them make it clear that some companies are still not getting the power of social media. Get something wrong online and boy you better be prepared for the backlash.
In Motrin’s case, the company has removed the ad from their website, although there are other versions that have made it to print so the damage could be long-running. In the BackUp example, the jury is still out on whether lessons have been learned.
Yet it’s also obvious in both cases that there have been some major lapses of co-ordinated and cohesive thinking. But who’s to blame for this – the agency that came up with these ideas, or the client that offered final approval?
Going by some of the comments doing the rounds on Twitter and the blogosphere, much of the thinking seems to be aimed at the marketing or advertising agency responsible for the Motrin campaign. After all, they’re the ones that came up with the idea in the first place, right?
So where does the final responsibility stand? Is it with the agency or the client? Someone must have approved the advert to go out, and that wouldn’t have been a decision that lay with the agency in question. It would have been one of the main decision-makers at Motrin.
And therein lies the quandary. Does the final decision really lie with the client? If I’m a pharmaceutical business owner that employs a marketing, PR or advertising agency to run a campaign for me, it’s because I trust them to do a job that I know nothing about. I’ll stick to making pills because that’s what I know. You’re my agency, you’re my specialist – you guide me.
But is that really true? I’m not so sure. Speaking from personal experience, when I’m putting together a PR campaign for a client, I’m there right up until the final decision. At that stage, I’ve offered all my recommendations, all my strategies and subsequent follow-ups. Now it’s up to my client to decide how he or she wants to move forward.
After all, this is their company that’s going to be out in the firing line if things go wrong, so they need to be 100% sure they’re happy with what they’re doing, and have the confidence to see it through. If they have any qualms at all, they don’t go ahead with the suggestions and we either start again or go our separate ways.
It’s a tough one to call. Company decision or agency recommendation.
What do you think? Should Motrin or businesses in the same situation be the ones that take responsibility? Or is it an agency problem?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment and subscribe to my RSS feed or via email to ensure you can enjoy the latest post(s).
10 Responses to “When to Blame the Agency and When to Blame the Client”
Before the Video was released early yesterday morning, it was clear to a few of us on Twitter that Motrin has just plain messed up.
Yes, it is the company that is ultimately responsible.
1) Motrin hired the ad agency and approved by some means or another for them to go ahead with the offending video.
2) For all we know, the ad agency could have recommended AGAINST the video, and Motrin chose to run it anyway.I’ve done marketing pieces as contracted for companies and people who insisted to have things “their” way. Their bottom line is that they paid us to do a job and that we are to do it the way they tell us to – even if we disagree.
Bound by contract, I have put out work I did not feel was “my” best nor in the best interest of my client.
Ultimately, no matter how you slice it – the responsibility is with the “owner” of piece. In this case, the owner is Motrin.
Aloha!
Arleen Anderson
http://www.AlohaArleen.com
http://www.Twitter.com/AlohaArleen@ Lizz. This is the problem facing companies today. Consumers in general don’t see the people behind the idea – they just see the face of the campaign and whether it’s good or bad. In this case, it appears to be bad and the face is Motrin. I agree with you in that the client is ultimately responsible – but then I guess that then begs the question as to how much influence you’re paying an agency for.
@ Arleen. This is why companies really need to get to grips with social media. In the past, if a company like Motrin had released a video that upset its target audience, it could take up to a week or more for feedback to start coming through. With bloggers and Twitter offering such an instant and vociferous audience, the hit is more instant. What makes this worse is that it happened over a weekend, so if no-one at Motrin or the agency in question is monitoring the web, 3 days is a long time for negative criticism.
As I mentioned in response to Lizz, I agree that the ultimate blame lies with the client, especially if they have acted against better judgment. It’ll be interesting to see how this all pans out. If the agency had the rug pulled from under them and Motrin went ahead with the ad anyway, then the agency needs to make sure this comes out somehow.
It does all make me wonder what happened to focus group testing prior to release?
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your views, appreciate it.
Always the company, but ideas generated from agencies should be proofed, proofed again, proofed once more, and then read over … You get my point. The company has final say, but when a brainstorm session of highly paid professionals (who can be persuasive) results in a passionate pitch … Company decision-makers can sometimes forget to remove the spending blinders.
I saw the video and get the ad … I get the outrage … And I get the reputation-repair long-haul ahead, however, I believe some moms will not see this as alienation, rather a voice of someone who gets how hard it is (which at least helps me understand the reasoning behind the ad). That being said … Motrin should have run something else.
Thanks Danny!
This is where the grey area can come in at times, I feel. As you say, at the end of the day, the final decision should always be with the company. But then, at the same time, I can understand “less confident” companies placing all the trust in the agency. That’s why they’re paying the fees, after all.
It has been interesting to see the split on various online mediums – some moms are still outraged, some are calm, some are more diplomatic, while the rest didn’t see a problem with it. I guess it’s true that you can’t please everyone all of the time.
Thanks for offering your take, I appreciate it.
They’re both to blame–and they’ll both suffer for this debacle! The public will hold the company accountable and I’m sure the company will hold the agency accountable.
It is kind of a vicious circle, Karen, although I’d be inclined to say that of the two, the company would suffer the most. Agencies often move on without too much problem; company reputations are a bit harder to repair.
Credit to Motrin, though, they’ve started off well enough.
From a PR standpoint, the company takes the hit, not the agency, so the final responsibility for decisions lie with the company. Agencies are theoretically supposed to push the envelope. Did anyone look at the Web site for Taxi NYC (the agency involved)? They say right up front that they tell “…compelling stories across all mediums. Whether it’s a spot, a site or a stunt…”
Any agency that traffics in “stunts” obviously needs to be monitored rather closely, don’t you think? That’s what the client should have been thinking.
Personally, I didn’t find the ad offensive and I thought that those who wanted to waste time ranting about it have WAY too much time on their hands. It was just plain silly.
That said, however, we live in a 24/7 world and nobody gets to choose their crises. There is absolutely no excuse for a company with the resources to do national advertising to be asleep at the wheel – especially a company that should have a crisis communication plan at the ready. Hey, anybody remember tainted Tylenol? With the advent of social media, a crisis could just as easily involve cranky consumers as crazy criminals. Any marketing exec (especially anyone in PR) who hadn’t already figured that one out, should know it now.
Carri Bugbee
Big Deal PR, Inc.
http://www.bigdealpr.com
Social profiles: https://chi.mp/s/carribugbee.mpHi Carri,
It does seem to hint at a bit of naivety on Motrin’s side (which is surprising, given the scope of the company). As you rightly mention, any agency that advertises themselves as stunt organizers should make you a bit more curious as to what that actually entails. Naivety that no-one from either Motrin’s in-house PR team or from the agency in question seemed to be monitoring the reactions that were taking place.
If there’s one good thing to come out of this, it’s that the media has changed irrevocably and companies really need to start taking more notice of social media and how it affects business. Motrin has already said it has had its eyes opened to the online voice – more companies (and agencies) need to take their lead.
Thanks for offering your view, I appreciate you stopping by.
Excellent post, as usual, Danny. I think the client is ultimately responsible. Bottom line, they’re the advertiser. The agency is transparent. The consumer doesn’t know or care about the agency. The message is the product, and the reputation of the product is what sells (or doesn’t). Personally, I wasn’t offended by the Motrin ad, but I WAS fascinated to see the groundswell on Twitter about it; and Motrin’s untimely response to the outcries.
Keep up the good work, my friend.