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…

Did She Run Or Did She "Just Fake It" For Adidas?

Andrea Chong, a Adidas appointed influencer, posted a photo of herself in the middle of the Standard Chartered Singapore Marathon 2015 and captioned how she was "all smiles" during the run.

Unfortunately for Andrea or the PR agency, one of her readers checked her bib number #75148  at the Marathon's website only to find it to belonging to somebody else.

That somebody else is Kuvin Kuar, a intern at Edelman PR and the bib number had a status "DNF" or did not finished.

This raised the first red flag as one of the rules stated that "A Participants is strictly not allowed to transfer his or her race entry to another party".

This cascaded into perceptions that Andrea herself did not even start or complete the race and was only "planted" by Adidas or the PR agency, Edelman PR, to look pretty in the marathon.

Marketing Magazine noted that Adidas declined to comment about the incident which lead to further speculation that Andrea was possibly just …

Kudos To Huawei 2 Year Warranty For P9 Series

When it comes to smartphones, I think I am jinxed.

For my history of owning smartphones, every time it comes close to the end of the two year contract with my mobile service provider. This time round, it happened to my Huawei P9.

All of a sudden, the LCD screen sort of decolourised. I thought it was a temporary issue but the decolourisation lasted for a few hours. Then the nightmare began.

The touchscreen couldn't be touched. This made it the smartphone a brick.

I thought the Huawei P9 only had one year of warrant. With my contract ending in mid-year, I thought I would have to wait it out till the contract ended and allowed me to buy a new phone under a contract.

Luckily, a friend reminded me that the phone came with a 2 year warranty.

So I decided to go to the Huawei service center, right smack in the center of the city, to see if my phone is under warranty and if Huawei would honour their 2 year warranty.

Thankfully, Huawei isn't as popular as the Samsungs or Apples, and the …