Retailer admits newspaper promotion was 'wrong'.

[Car Boot]

The "pressure group" of decent people who hate the lied filled rag.

If those happen to be people who might shop at Paperchase then they're entirely justified in expressing their opinion to paperchase and advising it that they won't support shops (by shopping at them) if they advertise in that paper.

 

I've read reports of people refusing to shop at 'Paperchase' (and urging all of their friends and families to do the same) because the people at the top of this immature and incompetent company evidently believe that by advertising in a newspaper they are endorsing that newspaper's editorial line.

 

'Paperchase' ran a reader promotion which will have had a significant cost factor for the retailer. To then state afterwards on social media that it was unaware of the reputation of the 'Daily Mail' newspaper suggests 'Paperchase' thinks that it's customers are as naive as it's senior management.

 

The people employed at 'Paperchase' must be the only ones in the UK to have never heard of the 'Daily Mail'.

Edited November 23, 2017 by Car Boot

[I1L2T3]

I am not happy with the way this pressure group operates, the DM, etc is appalling, but is this the way to go? One day it could be a growing left media(yes i know) who could be subject to this approach, and of course in the U.S it was advertisers themselves who frequently dictated output, less now with the streaming services.

 

it also just doesn't sit right.

 

It operates mainly through social media, and that’s where most of the young people get their news feeds.

 

And young people generally don’t read the dead tree press, and generally don’t tolerate hard right wing nutjobbery.

 

If paperchase wants to market itself as a shop where young people (and by that I mean the under 50s) visit then association with the Mail is best avoided. They’ve found that out now.

 

---------- Post added 23-11-2017 at 18:16 ----------

 

I've read reports of people refusing to shop at 'Paperchase' (and urging all of their friends and families to do the same) because the people at the top of this immature and incompetent company evidently believe that by advertising in a newspaper they are endorsing that newspaper's editorial line.

 

'Paperchase' ran a reader promotion which will have had a significant cost factor for the retailer. To then state afterwards on social media that it was unaware of the reputation of the 'Daily Mail' newspaper suggests 'Paperchase' thinks that it's customers are as naive as it's senior management.

 

The people employed at 'Paperchase' must be the only ones in the UK to have never heard of the 'Daily Mail'.

 

The next Private Eye will make it clear how this association came about

[Anna B]

It's a legitimate use of consumer pressure to tell a shop you won't shop there if they advertise in the right wing press.

It's not a smear, it's consumer pressure.

 

---------- Post added 23-11-2017 at 12:20 ----------

 

There was a large campaign against nectar points as well when they formed some kind of DM tie up.

 

I don't think people realise just how much power they have if they organise, stick together, and vote with their feet.

 

It's probably the only power they have left.

[Robin-H]

I don't think people realise just how much power they have if they organise, stick together, and vote with their feet.

 

It's probably the only power they have left.

 

What other powers did people use to have that have been taken away from them?

[Car Boot]

It's a basic freedom for a consumer to avoid purchasing goods and services from an organisation - for any reason whatsoever. Something the BBC is unique in refusing to recognise, incidentally.

 

If a consumer wishes to influence others in their spending habits, either through word of mouth or by social media, then that too is fine and entirely legal.

 

What I have a problem with is a company (Paperchase) using the Daily Mail newspaper to maximise sales and then, after criticism, this:

 

"We’ve listened to you about this weekend’s newspaper promotion. We now know we were wrong to do this - we’re truly sorry and we won’t ever do it again. Thanks for telling us what you really think and we apologise if we have let you down on this one. Lesson learnt." Tweet by Paperchase.

 

Paperchase is guilty of a cynical manipulation of public opinion. Are we really to believe that this company was completely unaware of the editorial tone and content of the Daily Mail?

 

Just how stupid does Paperchase imagine it's customers to be?

Edited November 23, 2017 by Car Boot

[Waldo]

It's a basic freedom for a consumer to avoid purchasing goods and services from an organisation - for any reason whatsoever. Something the BBC is unique in refusing to recognise, incidentally.

 

If a consumer wishes to influence others in their spending habits, either through word of mouth or by social media, then that too is fine and entirely legal.

 

What I have a problem with is a company (Paperchase) using the Daily Mail newspaper to maximise sales and then, after criticism, this:

 

"We’ve listened to you about this weekend’s newspaper promotion. We now know we were wrong to do this - we’re truly sorry and we won’t ever do it again. Thanks for telling us what you really think and we apologise if we have let you down on this one. Lesson learnt." Tweet by Paperchase.

 

Paperchase is guilty of a cynical manipulation of public opinion. Are we to believe that this company was really completely unaware of the editorial tone and content of the Daily Mail?

 

Just how stupid does Paperchase imagine it's customers to be?

 

Yep, it strikes me a being disingenuous, more or a PR exercise / damage limitation, than a heart felt apology. I would imagine they were well aware of the nature of the DM all along.

[choogling]

Theres a newspaper spreading xenophobia, racism and hatred by twisting facts and telling twisted stories. Its called the Daily Mail.

 

I have just forwarded your insulting comment to the Daily Mail, their legal team will probably give you a call.

[I1L2T3]

I have just forwarded your insulting comment to the Daily Mail, their legal team will probably give you a call.

 

Did you really?

 

What will they do?

 

Try and prevent somebody from expressing an opinion?

[choogling]

Did you really?

 

What will they do?

 

Try and prevent somebody from expressing an opinion?

 

sounds more like a libellous rant than an opinion.

[Cyclone]

It's a basic freedom for a consumer to avoid purchasing goods and services from an organisation - for any reason whatsoever. Something the BBC is unique in refusing to recognise, incidentally.

 

If a consumer wishes to influence others in their spending habits, either through word of mouth or by social media, then that too is fine and entirely legal.

 

What I have a problem with is a company (Paperchase) using the Daily Mail newspaper to maximise sales and then, after criticism, this:

 

"We’ve listened to you about this weekend’s newspaper promotion. We now know we were wrong to do this - we’re truly sorry and we won’t ever do it again. Thanks for telling us what you really think and we apologise if we have let you down on this one. Lesson learnt." Tweet by Paperchase.

 

Paperchase is guilty of a cynical manipulation of public opinion. Are we really to believe that this company was completely unaware of the editorial tone and content of the Daily Mail?

 

Just how stupid does Paperchase imagine it's customers to be?

 

They didn't realise just how strongly people felt, or that their core demographic were strongly against the right wing press, or perhaps just how easily a movement can organise and gain publicity through social media (most likely the latter).

Social media has actually given consumers a great way to organise and to really make companies hurt when they behave in a way that goes against the values of their core customers.

 

---------- Post added 23-11-2017 at 21:39 ----------

 

I have just forwarded your insulting comment to the Daily Mail, their legal team will probably give you a call.

 

Hahaha, they can call me as well.

They're a xenophobic, hate filled rag that prints lies and should be put out of business.

And I'll happily offer a defence of 'truth' in court if they want to go there.

 

---------- Post added 23-11-2017 at 21:39 ----------

 

sounds more like a libellous rant than an opinion.

 

Sounds more like a statement of fact to be honest. Which bit do you think isn't true?