5 ms·

I suspect a carefully coordinated PR campaign for Chick-fil-A, as I've noticed uncharacteristically, frequent positive references to them in unrelated news item

I suspect a carefully coordinated PR campaign for Chick-fil-A, as I've noticed uncharacteristically, frequent positive references to them in unrelated news items lately. I consume a lot of news, and noticing "fake" planted positive references in tangentially related articles is par for the course for any company that stepped in deep shit like they did. I suspect at least one of these positive comments here to be a plant as well. If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works.

drcode 13y ago
Probably true, except for the part about chicfila staff trolling HN.
- bsenftner 13y ago
  I would have thought so too, until meeting some recent college graduates who did exactly that for a LA based PR firm. HR specifically was one of their 'influence sites' they made sure to hit.
  - xux 13y ago
    Don't be so cynical. They're just hacking the press.
janesvilleseo 13y ago
I agree with you, based on personal experience this happens, a lot. In the organizations I have been with, not everyone in the company even know it was a planted piece.
yetanotherphd 13y ago
There are hundreds of stories about various companies on hn. The fact that you single out this one says more about your liberal bias than its objective "fakeness".
- rooster8 13y ago
  There may be hundreds of stories about various companies, but they aren't like this one. It seemed to be about generosity, and only tangentially about Chick-Fil-A, but I couldn't help (1) imagining myself being generous in my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through and (2) imagining myself feeling the warmth of someone else's generosity at my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through (which I've never experienced in real life).
- jbooth 13y ago
  He didn't say anything about liberals, conservatives or Chick-fil-a's noxious gay marriage positions. Who's biased? The article mentions chick-fil-a by name 3 times in the text and at the bottom, it's one of 3 terms that you can sign up for email alerts about. This is right after they had a run of bad publicity (yes, caused by politics, but that's irrelevant). Seems to fit in the PR-created article category to me.
  - yetanotherphd 13y ago
    Actually he did refer to how Chick-fil-a "stepped in deep shit".
    - gonnakillme 13y ago
      I took that as a statement of fact (akin to "Chick-fil-a faced a public relations disaster ...") rather than a value judgement.
      - yetanotherphd 13y ago
        Agreed, but I think it's indicative of a liberal bias, or at least living in a liberal bubble, to place so much weight on something that most people have long forgotten about (especially the kind of person who eats there). And the post I was responding to claimed that these things weren't even mentioned by the top poster, which they clearly were.
        13y ago
dictum 13y ago
pg wrote about the art of carefully disguised PR campaigns: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- gdubs 13y ago
  He also mentioned that they were never able to crack the New York Times :) That was, however, some time ago.
  - jeorgun 13y ago
    Also, that Viaweb never made it to the New York Times doesn't mean that nobody then did. Note the first sentence of the essay ;)
    - gdubs 13y ago
      Ha, great point! I had based my comment on memory. Also, worth mentioning that while I don't want to be overly cynical, this article does sound like a brilliant PR campaign. Given the size of typical PR budgets, you could afford a lot of free fast-food lunches for people.
- joshu 13y ago
  That article was originally about me and was wrong. So there's that.
jbuzbee 13y ago
I don't know about that, but I do know that the only time I have had a pay-forward experience was at Chick-fil-A. And it was fun!
protomyth 13y ago
Really, that's what this article says to you? Sometime folks look at others who are not doing so well and decide to pick up the tab, or just feel like doing it for a complete stranger. Some of its religion, some of it is just spreading the wealth. Sometime its just looking at others in bad situations. Sometimes its just to make themselves feel better. I've done it a couple of times. I payed for a young lady at a McDonalds because their credit card machine was out and she didn't have cash and had a kid with her. No big deal for me, but I would imagine it helped her day. I've bought one of the pink coffee mugs (breast cancer awareness) and told the clerk to give it to the next lady who comes in. I got to see the reaction, but she never knew who bought it. Spread a little joy, the world's a circle and it comes back to you. "If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works." No, I just find it sad that you believe the dark corners of the world define the whole.
- npc 13y ago
  It's not that he doesn't believe this happens, but rather that the presence of a story about it in NYT where chick-fil-a is mentioned directly in the first paragraph is not an accidental matter. Chick-fil-a being the main restaurant talked about in a feel good article like this is great PR for them, discounting the possibility of it having been arranged deliberately just because the op was overly cynical is a bit petulant. PR is almost never about making things up, but rather the timing and the tone and the things mentioned in the periphery of the story. PR firms know that a straight-up story on how chick-fil-a is great is not likely to do much for them with world-weary americans, but a feel good story about people helping each other (which may very well have happened) with chick-fil-a strategically placed just in the background is great.
  - protomyth 13y ago
    Given the leanings of the NYT, I cannot imagine a feel good article about Chick-Fil-A will ever appear in their pages because of money. They have refused advertising several times because it doesn't jive with their editorial policy. [edit] also see Natsu's comment for an additional thought against it being an ad for Chick-Fil-A.
Natsu 13y ago
The article mentions a dozen different restaurants. Why do you believe this was Chick-fil-a rather than one of the others?
- bsenftner 13y ago
  Well, they are mentioned in the first sentence, and repeatedly returned to throughout. Any of the other restaurants are done in group references, without being singled out. My suspicion was up as the entire first person framing of the article began, pulling the reader into this fantasy reality where fast food meals are paid for by strangers. Perhaps its the lack of any point to the article. Sure, I can accept human interest articles, but that one smells to fishy.
  - Natsu 13y ago
    > this fantasy reality where fast food meals are paid for by strangers This is not a fantastical practice. While it is not particularly common, I've heard of it quite a few times (most of which had nothing to do with Chick-fil-A) and have done similar things myself.
dmourati 13y ago
Unbelievably sad.
t2d2 13y ago
It could be a made up story, but there is a drive through coffee place in Michigan where this happens every so often. they even have a radio station sometimes coordinate it sometimes to see how long a chain they can get going.

drcode 13y ago

Probably true, except for the part about chicfila staff trolling HN.

bsenftner 13y ago
I would have thought so too, until meeting some recent college graduates who did exactly that for a LA based PR firm. HR specifically was one of their 'influence sites' they made sure to hit.
- xux 13y ago
  Don't be so cynical. They're just hacking the press.

janesvilleseo 13y ago

I agree with you, based on personal experience this happens, a lot. In the organizations I have been with, not everyone in the company even know it was a planted piece.

yetanotherphd 13y ago

There are hundreds of stories about various companies on hn. The fact that you single out this one says more about your liberal bias than its objective "fakeness".

rooster8 13y ago
There may be hundreds of stories about various companies, but they aren't like this one. It seemed to be about generosity, and only tangentially about Chick-Fil-A, but I couldn't help (1) imagining myself being generous in my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through and (2) imagining myself feeling the warmth of someone else's generosity at my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through (which I've never experienced in real life).
jbooth 13y ago
He didn't say anything about liberals, conservatives or Chick-fil-a's noxious gay marriage positions. Who's biased? The article mentions chick-fil-a by name 3 times in the text and at the bottom, it's one of 3 terms that you can sign up for email alerts about. This is right after they had a run of bad publicity (yes, caused by politics, but that's irrelevant). Seems to fit in the PR-created article category to me.
- yetanotherphd 13y ago
  Actually he did refer to how Chick-fil-a "stepped in deep shit".
  - gonnakillme 13y ago
    I took that as a statement of fact (akin to "Chick-fil-a faced a public relations disaster ...") rather than a value judgement.
    - yetanotherphd 13y ago
      Agreed, but I think it's indicative of a liberal bias, or at least living in a liberal bubble, to place so much weight on something that most people have long forgotten about (especially the kind of person who eats there). And the post I was responding to claimed that these things weren't even mentioned by the top poster, which they clearly were.
      - 13y ago

dictum 13y ago

pg wrote about the art of carefully disguised PR campaigns: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

gdubs 13y ago
He also mentioned that they were never able to crack the New York Times :) That was, however, some time ago.
- jeorgun 13y ago
  Also, that Viaweb never made it to the New York Times doesn't mean that nobody then did. Note the first sentence of the essay ;)
  - gdubs 13y ago
    Ha, great point! I had based my comment on memory. Also, worth mentioning that while I don't want to be overly cynical, this article does sound like a brilliant PR campaign. Given the size of typical PR budgets, you could afford a lot of free fast-food lunches for people.
joshu 13y ago
That article was originally about me and was wrong. So there's that.

jbuzbee 13y ago

I don't know about that, but I do know that the only time I have had a pay-forward experience was at Chick-fil-A. And it was fun!

protomyth 13y ago

Really, that's what this article says to you? Sometime folks look at others who are not doing so well and decide to pick up the tab, or just feel like doing it for a complete stranger. Some of its religion, some of it is just spreading the wealth. Sometime its just looking at others in bad situations. Sometimes its just to make themselves feel better. I've done it a couple of times. I payed for a young lady at a McDonalds because their credit card machine was out and she didn't have cash and had a kid with her. No big deal for me, but I would imagine it helped her day. I've bought one of the pink coffee mugs (breast cancer awareness) and told the clerk to give it to the next lady who comes in. I got to see the reaction, but she never knew who bought it. Spread a little joy, the world's a circle and it comes back to you. "If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works." No, I just find it sad that you believe the dark corners of the world define the whole.

npc 13y ago
It's not that he doesn't believe this happens, but rather that the presence of a story about it in NYT where chick-fil-a is mentioned directly in the first paragraph is not an accidental matter. Chick-fil-a being the main restaurant talked about in a feel good article like this is great PR for them, discounting the possibility of it having been arranged deliberately just because the op was overly cynical is a bit petulant. PR is almost never about making things up, but rather the timing and the tone and the things mentioned in the periphery of the story. PR firms know that a straight-up story on how chick-fil-a is great is not likely to do much for them with world-weary americans, but a feel good story about people helping each other (which may very well have happened) with chick-fil-a strategically placed just in the background is great.
- protomyth 13y ago
  Given the leanings of the NYT, I cannot imagine a feel good article about Chick-Fil-A will ever appear in their pages because of money. They have refused advertising several times because it doesn't jive with their editorial policy. [edit] also see Natsu's comment for an additional thought against it being an ad for Chick-Fil-A.

Natsu 13y ago

The article mentions a dozen different restaurants. Why do you believe this was Chick-fil-a rather than one of the others?

bsenftner 13y ago
Well, they are mentioned in the first sentence, and repeatedly returned to throughout. Any of the other restaurants are done in group references, without being singled out. My suspicion was up as the entire first person framing of the article began, pulling the reader into this fantasy reality where fast food meals are paid for by strangers. Perhaps its the lack of any point to the article. Sure, I can accept human interest articles, but that one smells to fishy.
- Natsu 13y ago
  > this fantasy reality where fast food meals are paid for by strangers This is not a fantastical practice. While it is not particularly common, I've heard of it quite a few times (most of which had nothing to do with Chick-fil-A) and have done similar things myself.

dmourati 13y ago

Unbelievably sad.

t2d2 13y ago

It could be a made up story, but there is a drive through coffee place in Michigan where this happens every so often. they even have a radio station sometimes coordinate it sometimes to see how long a chain they can get going.