A brief case study showcasing how a PR stunt can go viral in a bad way via social media and how corporate reputations were impacted positively and negatively.

2. It’s the week after the Super Bowl and its fair to say that it is a tough week in New England

3. …. A very, very tough week……..

4. ………so a brand named Pawngo decided to drop a thousand Butterfingers in Copley Square,
Boston in order to make an impression...

5. An impression they made; the fallout was widespread for Pawngo, Groupon and Butterfinger

6. Clearly – things were out of control, with brands managing a damage limitation strategy against
thousands of angry fans who are looking for a target for their anger.

7. …. So Pawngo’s CEO posted an apology, loosely disguised as a sales pitch – this did not help…

8. So now fans and commenters are offended – its become a movement

9. Pawngo trending as a topic
on social channels
Little to no brand chatter
before #butterfingergate
Brand mentions fade
Neutral sentiment
skyrockets
So does negative sentiment
The key here is impact – there is no long tail on the campaign – just immediate negative
sentiment

10. Butterfinger responded with a full page in the Boston Globe and won over the nets.
#Butterfingergate trends and positive sentiment for their brand increases also

11. Badly judged concept that hit the wrong market at the wrong time
Reaction was too slow, and social engagement was poorly managed
Underestimation of sentiment allowed the brand to react with a half apology/ half sales
pitch, which exacerbated the issue
Other brands were dragged in and each reacted in their own way (if slowly), but neither
were able to disassociate themselves by reacting quickly enough
This PR nightmare was not taken seriously enough from the start and Pawngo
attempted to turn the challenge into a sales pitch – wrong time and badly done
Without awareness, speed of response is hampered. Without a plan, the response was
messy. Without reputation management, the three brands all had cost without upside

13. Recon Deploy Rescue

15. 






16. 
–
–
–
–
–

–
–



–