New Law Encourages Cities To Overreact To Marketing Stunts
from the missing-the-real-hazard dept
Back in January, the city of Boston embarrassed itself by massively overreacting to a simple guerrilla marketing stunt, which it treated as a possible terrorist attack. The response basically shut down the city for several hours, demonstrating that the city's incompetence had major ramifications for businesses and individuals. In an attempt to save face, the city tried (and failed) to put the blame on the people behind the stunt, and then followed up with a promise to enact a (useless) law against such marketing techniques. Not surprisingly, politicians in Washington have taken up the city's cause and are promoting something called the "Terrorist Hoax Improvements Act of 2007". No, the law isn't designed to improve terrorist hoaxes, but rather to allow cities to sue people behind Boston-like "hoaxes" (it wasn't a hoax at all), for any ensuing chaos. Again, of course, the whole premise of the law assumes that the city did the right thing in reacting as it did. Unfortunately, as Cato's Jim Harper notes, there's no provision in the law that would allow all of the people inconvenienced by the city's reaction to sue the city.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
More frivilous lawsuites
This law will backfire at some point in the future, mark my words.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More frivolous lawsuits
Babyboomers; a generation of whiny feel-good finger-pointers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
(b) Civil Action-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute an offense listed under subsection (a)(1) is liable in a civil action to any party incurring expenses incident to any emergency or investigative response to that conduct, for those expenses.
Is it just me, or does this lay blame on the people who called in the LED signs as bombs in Boston? Also, the phrase "with intent" would let the Boston guys off the hook, still, because they didn't intend on people thinking the signs were bombs.
*sigh* Where is the reset button for our government? We saved after the signing of the Constitution, didn't we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
Unfortunately, the reset button is revolution. That may be what it comes down to in order to oust the corporatist regime that which currently infests our government.
Its not corruption...its business :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
6 islamic radicals were arrested today in my home state for plotting to murder soldiers at Ft. Dix. They had all lived in the US for quite a while.
Things are not as safe as we think.
You talk of personal responsibility and marketing companies need to know they will be held responsible when some stunt they pull goes bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
First off...who chose the name "Dix"?? And, why?
> You talk of personal responsibility and marketing companies need to know
> they will be held responsible when some stunt they pull goes bad.
Probably so. But, so should the city; and it's getting off clean.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RandomThoughts
Not comparable. There were not "suspiciouns" that the shooter at Virgina Tech had psychological problems, it was known. Those shootings were because people were attempting to balance the rights of the mentally disturbed with the rights of those affected by his madness. If they had locked him away, we would be arguing about the violation of his civil rights.
You have a over 100,000 times greater chance of being killed crossing the street then of being blown up by a digital cartoon character. Maybe we should worry about the problems that kill the most people rather then the ones that are the most fun for the news agencies? The world isn't safe and you will die. You might want to get use to that idea because you don't really have a choice.
What did they do wrong? They placed advertisements around a city. If the city had asked why they were there, I'm sure they would have answered. Since when did we pass a law making it a crime to be weird? Be sides, they did come out and apologize for scaring all the stupid people and I for one didn't care either way... I just wasn't going to park under one until I know what was holding it up there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Overreacted or underreacted?
Until we realize that in a free society, we have to be individually responsible for our own lives, and stop bitching about someone not protecting us, we're doomed. Of course, with that, we need the RIGHTS and FREEDOM to to protect ourselves.
I do find it particularly ironic that as written, it looks like INTENT is key to the new law, which means that it would not have had any impact on the Boston incident... Yea.. another useless law...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
6 islamic radicals were arrested today in my home state for plotting to murder soldiers at Ft. Dix. They had all lived in the US for quite a while. Things are not as safe as we think.
After the massive lies perpetuated about Jose Padilla and the dirty bomb they said he was planning on using, I think I'll wait for the evidence on the so-called Fort Dix plotters before passing judgement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I just wish people would get over the fact that there will always be violence. People will always die and/or suffer at the hands of others. I would rather take my chances at getting injured by an unknown, than have my rights and freedoms knowingly taken away by the government. I fear the government more than any terrorist or crazy shooter let loose in the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For the LOVE OF GOD!!! Could they include 'campaign' signs in that mix???
I mean - seriously... it's possible to disguise a bomb as a campaign sign, right? Let's play it safe and just ban them :)
Afterall,
with intent to convey false or misleading information
So.... if they say they aren't going to raise taxes - and they do... They are in violation, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Double standard...
And appearantly there is no provision for the people that were inconvenienced to sue. So if the city blocks the roads over one of these campaigns and an elderly person dies in the back of an EMS unit the city can sue the marketing company but the family of the elderly person that died can't? Unless the city is going to share the winnings/settlement with them I really don't think that's right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Boston blew up other stuff too
http://wbztv.com/local/local_story_059122735.html
The Boston mayor was right, there are crazed bomber going around blowing stuff up in Boston.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Boston blew up other stuff too
No kidding, and that traffic counter was placed their by the DOT... if anything the city should be apologizing for blowing up a tool paid for with tax payer money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Boston blew up other stuff too
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
riiiight
Riiiiiight. Cause we all know that a crazy phychopatch shooter is going to plant a bunch of LED advertising signs. We should all be thanking Boston for freaking out over silly nonsense that doesn't even come CLOSE to looking like terrorist activity. Yeah. If only Virginia Tech would have freaked out everytime someone posted an advertisement on campus...the shooting would have NEVER happened. (/sarcasm).
Face the facts. Your beloved idiot "leaders" in Boston are now making up retarded LAWS to try and put the blame on someone else for their ignorance and mass paranoia.
They overreacted and it's about time they admit it. I am so sick of hearing "if every city did what Boston did, there'd be no violence, no shootings, no attacks." Riiiight, suuuuuure! Keep living in your little bubble, that's fine. But please allow the rest of us to live. Don't take my freedoms and rights away because you're too stupid to know the difference between advertising and terrorism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ben Franklin didn't have to worry about that one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is what happens when you let corruption fester for hundreds of years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now, shuddup about the "imperialist" and "Hi-jacked" leaders we have. If you want a revolution...VOTE.
Damn Democrats creating stupid laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As long as your thinking in terms of Democrats and Republicans, they have won.
"Now, shuddup about the "imperialist" and "Hi-jacked" leaders we have. "
As long as you think there is a actual choice in the political arena they have won.
"If you don't like where our country is headed GET OFF YOUR ARSE and vote"
As long as you think just "voting" can make a difference they have won.
We need to start thinking outside the box and start challenging our government in REAL ways. If we want to get back to a government that is ruled by the people for the people then we need to start down a long hard road of revolution. It won't happen overnight, in fact it won't happen for countless years. It will be discouraging and the government will fight back, but there is a peaceful solution to the corruption that has infested our nation.
"Unfortunately, the reset button is revolution. That may be what it comes down to in order to oust the corporatist regime that which currently infests our government.
Its not corruption...its business :)"
Here here! :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uh... What!?
Second, this is just Democrats helping fellow Democrats to save face. Rather than admit that they are meatheads and move on, they dig themselves deeper into the hole.
...I never knew they could stack **** so high!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Scary much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amnesia
administration claimed there were WMD's then
sent a pack of cruise missiles over to punctuate
that message. It's funny how quickly politicians
develop amnesia when it's convenient. They were
all for the war before they were against it
excepting a very small minority, like Russ Feingold.
And I don't recall him disputing the WMD claims
neither.
Bush will be gone soon and nothing will change.
T'was ever thus oh rabid moonbats.
As for Boston, it's a good example of how large
organizations become ineffective. No one would
make the decision to call off the bomb squad
because with decision making comes responsibility.
If you don't stick your neck out it isn't chopped
off. Don't make waves, try to avoid making any
decisions at all cost... and tread water until
you're ready to collect your pension.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Amnesia
As for the "R" word you tossed out there (my favorite, responsiblity), you hit that nail on the head too. To many layers of un-empowered "bosses" and not nearly enough leadership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's really pretty hard to dispute something when the information you have has been slanted behind the scenes. As far as the original WMD claims only that which supported the claim were put forward. Don't forget that most of the "evidence" that was put forward was already suspect or already discounted and WAS KNOWN to be such by those who should have spoken up before hand.
In many ways it's a similar scene in Boston. Officials paniced (I love that the displays had been up for WEEKS before hand) and they started "looking" for suspicious things without thinking about what they were actually looking at.
Can someone who thinks that this new law is just so wonderful explain to me how it would actually work in this case? We've got the benefit of hindsight so I'd love to hear the reasoning on this.
The law states:
engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances
How specifically was this marketing campaign conducted with intent to convey false or misleading information?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The problem is with under circumstances. That can be spun, pretty much, any way needed -- including bypassing the intent.
It was their intent to convey the message, which was taken as false or misleading, and are thus punishable under [the current] circumstances.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: jLI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Need to enact an idiot tax
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
do away with all marketers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So with Bush be the first one charged?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Embarassed? I don't think so.
Marketing promotions are designed to get publicity. This one did - in spades. George E. Jessel said "I don't care what they say about me, as long as they spell my name right," in other words - there's no such thing as bad publicity. Turner got what they wanted, and then some. Paying off the city was cheap, compared to the name recognition they received. The two "masterminds" of this project treated the entire thing as one big joke. Unfortunately, it was a joke in the same vein as laughing as you pull a fire alarm in a crowded theatre.
The city of Boston did nothing wrong (unless you count not recognizing some obscure cartoon character as a mistake). Here's the irony - because of the way the media has treated this story, the next time this kind of things happen, the police and DHS guys might overlook it. Wouldn't that be a great way for some enterprising terrorist to take advantage of the "cry wolf" mentality?
Instead of criticizing Boston for trying to legislate common sense (always a mistake), why not support a plan whereby marketing companies think before they act - and take responsibility for their actions when they screw up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Embarassed? I don't think so.
When someone makes a post like yours, I assume that you work for the City of Boston Public Relations Department. How did you remember the company was Turner/Adult Swim?
Remember that -indirectly- this guy's salary depends on Boston pulling stunts like they do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not remotely true. It's more akin to laughing as you eat popcorn in a crowded theatre. If they put devices which looked like bombs out there, you'd have a point. But they placed illuminated roadside signs like any others, which didn't look like bombs in any of the other cities or during the weeks they were up in Boston prior to the brouhaha.
An espresso stand on my way to work recently added a strobe light to attract attention. No one cried "bomb" because it's a completely innocuous, normal method of advertising.
The possibility that the marketers then phoned in the scare to drum up more publicity exists, but has not been proven in any way, shape, or form. Equally possible-yet-wholly-unproven is that Boston city officials phoned in the scare to drum up more anti-terrorism dollars. We all saw how pissed NYC and Boston were when the latest round of funding was announced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]