Advertising 'Specifically' Designed to Attract Large Crowds
By Jack Neff
Published: December 03, 2008
BATAVIA, Ohio (AdAge.com) -- Security should have been better, but advertising also helped kill a temporary worker at Wal-Mart, according to a lawsuit filed by the estate and relatives of the 34-year-old man trampled by a pre-dawn Black Friday crowd at a Valley Stream, N.Y., store. At least one local police official and one retail marketing consultant also argue that Black Friday marketing and merchandising practices need to change in the wake of the incident.
A complaint filed today in New York State Supreme Court in the Bronx on behalf of survivors of the fallen worker, Jdimytai Damour, claims that besides failing to provide adequate security, Wal-Mart "engaged in specific marketing and advertising techniques to specifically attract a large crowd and create an environment of frenzy and mayhem," according to published reports.
I thought this was a very interesting case. I'm not sure what case can be made with regards to the advertising itself. I think the fault would lie more with the security personel, the actually store location, etc.
Here is the link to the entire article: http://adage.com/article?article_id=132999
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well we have probably all learned in psychology about mobs of people and psychology of crowds so I do believe it would probably be the fault of the individual store for not providing adequae security when they were probably expecting large crowds of people.
Tiffany,
I completely agree with you! I would think that it would in fact come down to the store's poor preparations for the large crowd. And I certainly think that the lawsuit is warranted - the man was trampled to death over Barbies (excuse me, Bratz if you read the above post!) and Power Rangers - come on people!!
"Burt Flickinger III, principal of the retail marketing consultancy Strategic Resource Group, believes marketing and merchandising practices around Black Friday need to change to ensure adequate stocks of sale-priced items are available or that shoppers receive numbers, deli-style, prior to store openings entitling them to merchandise. Such safeguards, he said, have helped other toy and electronics retailers avert unruly crowds during hot product launches or sales."
This statement is what I will comment on. I think there is a reasonable case against Walmart for false and misleading advertising. They are advertising that are advertising that not enough product is on hand when in actuality the store has plenty and they have guarantees that a person can return and get the lower price. There refund policy is exceptional and you can go back and get the advertise price as long as you buy it with the time frame. Generally, Walmart doesn't offer a low price only on one day as well. I think the FTC could step in here. It would be interesting to know if anyone did not recieve the item or did they run out of the item. Because then a class suit could be filed for Bait and Switch. The key is to view there advertisements and see if Walmart engaged in this act. They can also view them to see if they encouraged people to come in crowds to its stores. I think I remember seeing one company doing this. However, I was impress with Best Buy who placed ads discouraging people to come in crowds or feeling tense that they won't get the item that is on sell because the store had plenty for the customers to choose from. I like reading the post.
Post a Comment