Skip to main content

How Nestle should have reacted to Greenpeace’s video

Food giant, Nestle, is under attack in the social media after Greenpeace posted a video to protest against the use of palm oil in its Kit Kat chocolates which is said to result in deforestation of jungles in Indonesia, homes of Orang Utans.

(Caution: Video may spoil your lunch)

Have a break? from Greenpeace UK on Vimeo.

Fans or anti-Fans have taken to Nestle’s fanpage and attacking Nestle.

Image from

So what did Nestle do wrong to spark such fury among fans?

Mistake Number 01 – Requesting Youtube To Take The Video Down

We have seen so many times how a request for a take down which only results in the “Stresiand Effect”.

Asking Youtube to take down the video was the mistake made by Nestle.  Yes, the video is negative to Nestle’s image but by requesting for the take down creates the perception that there is something to hide.

I recently dealt with a negative review of a product for a client and it appeared online. I had to explain to the client that the review has been done and asking for a take down would only result in only more bad publicity.

All it takes for the author to complain that the client requested for a take down and his fans/friends to talk about the take down and that result in more negative awareness of the product.

In fact, there is about a video made of Nestle staff chatting on how to get Greenpeace to remove the video.

Mistake Number 02 – Not addressing the problem

So far, I have yet to see Nestle’s comment on the use of palm oil. Maybe it is unavoidable that palm oil, but Nestle could have explained, if they are, looking at palm oil substitutes. 

Mistake Number 03 – Not treating this a crisis

An attack on social media should be treated like any crisis. Why? Because any wrong small, no matter how small, will be taken advantage of.

So like in any crisis, it is always good to take out your crisis management textbooks and handle the crisis as professional as possible.

While this may not have any effect on Nestle’s share price, it will sure affect image and the public’s outcry for the food giant to be more environmentally friend will continue to grow.


Popular posts from this blog

Why is Ramly Burger banned in Singapore?

Yahoo Singapore ran an article of the Ramly Burger by highlighting that it is ban in Singapore.

Yet, the writer from Makansutra failed to address the most important issue of why the Ramly meat patty is banned in Singapore.

A search online easily did highlight that the famous Malaysian meat patty is banned by the AVA but didn't go into details.

Wrote Arlina Arshad for The Straits Times in January 2004,

"But the importing of beef and beef products from Malaysia is not permitted, said theAgri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA).

Selling and supplying them without a permit is also an offence, and offenders can befined as much as $50,000 or jailed two years, or both, said the AVA."

In May of the same year, another article highlighted that a man was even charged in court for "smuggling" the Ramly burger in 2004.

"The AVA said that meat products processed in Malaysian food factories which it had notapproved were banned here.Suzali was yesterday jailed for four month…

Those Who Gamble Online Have Poorest Control - NCG Survey In 2012

Singapore will soon exempt local operators, Singapore Pools and Turf Club, from online gambling ban and the sites will be ready in November 2016.

Ministry of Home Affairs explained that a complete ban on remote gambling drives demand and activities underground, and may create larger incentives for criminal syndicates to target Singapore."

Yet in a 2012 survey by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCG) found that those who gamble online have the poorest control.

For those who indulged in online gambling, 30.4% said they gambled for a longer period than they planned to, 33.3% gambled with more money than they planned and 29.2% gambled more frequently they planned to. 
Will launching the online gambling sites be like opening a Pandora Box that will create more issues in the future?

A Very Small Chicken Or An Oversized Popcorn Chicken?

Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) Singapore Facebook Page recently received a complaint of the size of the chicken being served at KFC.

Barnabas Ng took a photo of his chicken from KFC which showed it to be almost the size of the KFC small container. It also looked like a an oversize popcorn chicken.

Wrote Barnabas,

"Hi KFC, is this your new standard size for a chicken? I order 3 piece meal and 2 pieces including this so called original recipe chicken is smaller than the size of the cap of ur small mash potato.

Have you guys try to cut cost so much that you are offering half a size chicken pieces for a full price meal? It is just getting from bad to worse"

KFC Singapore did reply to Barnabas for him to PM his mobile number but Barnabas has yet to receive any calls from KFC Singapore, as of this posting.

Maybe chickens are also shrinking with the current climate change?