4 ms·

The offensive tweet: "How you can #SupportJapan – http://binged.it/fEh7iT http://binged.it/fEh7iT. For every retweet, @bing will give $1 to Japan quake victims

by steve19 16y ago

The offensive tweet: "How you can #SupportJapan – http://binged.it/fEh7iT http://binged.it/fEh7iT. For every retweet, @bing will give $1 to Japan quake victims, up to $100K." Using a national tragedy for marketing purposes is just sickening. Really really sickening. EDIT: Given the amount of downvotes, I suppose I should clarify that this is my perception, and this is probably perceived as many in this way. Marketing is about perception. This was a fail for Bing.

waterlesscloud 16y ago
I would agree, but this seriously doesn't look like an attempt at marketing. It looks like a way to let people be involved in Microsoft's giving. You're free to look at it in the worst possible light, but I'm having a hard time believing that's what they intended.
- Groxx 16y ago
  But then why did they @bing themselves, and why base it off retweets? Their support is entirely based on other people's willingness to spread @bing by Bing 100 thousand times. And what the heck is with that "apology"? Though they're now flat-donating 100k, doing it to make up after-the-fact doesn't change things, especially when it's so small from such a phenomenally wealthy company. Why is their support based on retweets? Why not state they're donating 100k and request retweet for the binged.it link for purposes of finding ways to help? Or better: make it two tweets, so they're not advertising their generosity with their support link. They don't even mention what the binged link is. Why didn't Microsoft bother to make it a more prominent link than one that's 166 characters long and nested in their "community involvement" section? This is a very nice comparison between Google's response and Microsoft's. "Resources related to the Japanese earthquake and tsunami." is right on the Google front page. Microsoft's mention is nested a dozen layers deep, with a banner of "Corporate Citizenship".
  - baddox 16y ago
    > why base it off of retweets? Because the link in the tweet is to Microsoft's Disaster Response page, and retweets will help spread this link. Google also uses their site to spread information about the disaster.
    - Groxx 16y ago
      But Google's information contains no blatant advertising of how much Google is doing to provide aid. It just provides information about how to help. I don't think their tweet was all that bad, but it is absolutely an advertising attempt. Intentional or no, they're clearly attempting to use people to spread how much they're helping, and their name. And information. But all that is useful is the information (and it's not even mentioned aside from an obfuscated link) - why is the rest there? In any case, the twitter world is already ablaze with help links: http://twitter.com/#!/search/help%20japan http://twitter.com/#!/search/help%20japan How many of the results there mention how much the tweeter has donated, much less corporate twitter accounts?
      - baddox 16y ago
        I think the idea is that the $1 donation is used as an incentive for people to retweet, which will draw more attention to the Microsoft Disaster Resources. Besides, is your argument that corporations should never publicly disclose charitable donations? If so, it's a pretty bold claim, and the vast majority of corporations are guilty.
        Groxx 16y ago
        Not at all. Just that there are more and less tasteful ways of doing so. This isn't one of the more tasteful ones. It could have been an accident, but it is what it is.
- steve19 16y ago
  It is all about perception. You may not think it looks like marketing, but it does to me and I am sure it does to many others. "For every dollar donated by twitter users, Bing will match it up to $100k" would have been appropriate, and gotten them a lot of retweets. Instead they took the same approach that SEOs and "social marketing experts" use. "If this retweets \d+ times, we will give you a chance to (win|donate) (ipods|ipads|cash)".
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > looks like a way to let people be involved in Microsoft's giving. Is there any other reason to get people involved in Microsoft's "generosity" than to promote it? As it is, they are holding their contribution for ransom (if you don't retweet their message, Japan will get less donations). How that's not a clumsy attempt to profit from the deaths of thousands of people?
extension 16y ago
I imagine just about everyone who might see that retweet has already heard of Bing, so at worst they are just marketing their own generocity, and that may actually provoke more generocity from their competitors.

by steve19 16y ago

waterlesscloud 16y ago

I would agree, but this seriously doesn't look like an attempt at marketing. It looks like a way to let people be involved in Microsoft's giving. You're free to look at it in the worst possible light, but I'm having a hard time believing that's what they intended.

Groxx 16y ago
But then why did they @bing themselves, and why base it off retweets? Their support is entirely based on other people's willingness to spread @bing by Bing 100 thousand times. And what the heck is with that "apology"? Though they're now flat-donating 100k, doing it to make up after-the-fact doesn't change things, especially when it's so small from such a phenomenally wealthy company. Why is their support based on retweets? Why not state they're donating 100k and request retweet for the binged.it link for purposes of finding ways to help? Or better: make it two tweets, so they're not advertising their generosity with their support link. They don't even mention what the binged link is. Why didn't Microsoft bother to make it a more prominent link than one that's 166 characters long and nested in their "community involvement" section? This is a very nice comparison between Google's response and Microsoft's. "Resources related to the Japanese earthquake and tsunami." is right on the Google front page. Microsoft's mention is nested a dozen layers deep, with a banner of "Corporate Citizenship".
- baddox 16y ago
  > why base it off of retweets? Because the link in the tweet is to Microsoft's Disaster Response page, and retweets will help spread this link. Google also uses their site to spread information about the disaster.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    But Google's information contains no blatant advertising of how much Google is doing to provide aid. It just provides information about how to help. I don't think their tweet was all that bad, but it is absolutely an advertising attempt. Intentional or no, they're clearly attempting to use people to spread how much they're helping, and their name. And information. But all that is useful is the information (and it's not even mentioned aside from an obfuscated link) - why is the rest there? In any case, the twitter world is already ablaze with help links: http://twitter.com/#!/search/help%20japan http://twitter.com/#!/search/help%20japan How many of the results there mention how much the tweeter has donated, much less corporate twitter accounts?
    - baddox 16y ago
      I think the idea is that the $1 donation is used as an incentive for people to retweet, which will draw more attention to the Microsoft Disaster Resources. Besides, is your argument that corporations should never publicly disclose charitable donations? If so, it's a pretty bold claim, and the vast majority of corporations are guilty.
      - Groxx 16y ago
        Not at all. Just that there are more and less tasteful ways of doing so. This isn't one of the more tasteful ones. It could have been an accident, but it is what it is.
steve19 16y ago
It is all about perception. You may not think it looks like marketing, but it does to me and I am sure it does to many others. "For every dollar donated by twitter users, Bing will match it up to $100k" would have been appropriate, and gotten them a lot of retweets. Instead they took the same approach that SEOs and "social marketing experts" use. "If this retweets \d+ times, we will give you a chance to (win|donate) (ipods|ipads|cash)".
rbanffy 16y ago
> looks like a way to let people be involved in Microsoft's giving. Is there any other reason to get people involved in Microsoft's "generosity" than to promote it? As it is, they are holding their contribution for ransom (if you don't retweet their message, Japan will get less donations). How that's not a clumsy attempt to profit from the deaths of thousands of people?

extension 16y ago

I imagine just about everyone who might see that retweet has already heard of Bing, so at worst they are just marketing their own generocity, and that may actually provoke more generocity from their competitors.