Thanks To The Web, Everybody's A Potential Critic -- So Treat Them Well

New Law Encourages Cities To Overreact To Marketing Stunts

from the missing-the-real-hazard dept

Tue, May 8th 2007 6:40am — Joseph Weisenthal

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

44 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Jerk, 8 May 2007 @ 7:00am

More frivilous lawsuites
Again, I say. Frivilous lawsuites should be banned.

This law will backfire at some point in the future, mark my words.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 8 May 2007 @ 7:12am

Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
From the bill:

(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 thread ]
RandomThoughts, 8 May 2007 @ 7:13am

Boston overreacted? Probably, but look at what happens when you don't react. We have read about all the warning signs in the Virginia Tech shooting. Maybe some overreacting should have happened there.

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 thread ]
jLl, 8 May 2007 @ 7:24am

Re:
> murder soldiers at Ft. Dix.
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 thread ]
Monarch, 8 May 2007 @ 7:27am

This world never was, nor ever will be a safe place. There has been violence and bloodshed throughout human history. The only differences between now and then, are 1) Larger population, with a greater number of unstable people in it, due to the larger population. And 2) News of events travels faster and farther than it ever has in the history of humankind.

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 thread ]
Overcast, 8 May 2007 @ 7:29am

One thing....

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 thread ]
Sanguine Dream, 8 May 2007 @ 7:32am

Double standard...
So when a group does a marketing campaign like that one in Boston they should own up to the possibility of get sued but when the city overreacts not only do they get to sue but they get to put the blame on someone else.

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 thread ]
ehrichweiss, 8 May 2007 @ 7:44am

Re:
I was thinking along those same lines. If this is enacted there will be a lot of unforeseen(by most) backlash and I'm betting that we'll see the same type of action as was taken on that judge over the Eminent Domain ruling.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Casper, 8 May 2007 @ 7:44am

Re: RandomThoughts
Boston overreacted? Probably, but look at what happens when you don't react. We have read about all the warning signs in the Virginia Tech shooting. Maybe some overreacting should have happened there.

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.

Things are not as safe as we think.

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.

You talk of personal responsibility and marketing companies need to know they will be held responsible when some stunt they pull goes bad.

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 thread ]
NotATerrorWrist, 8 May 2007 @ 7:47am

Boston blew up other stuff too
They also blew up a traffic counter (one of those boxes with the two air hoses that go across the street and count traffic).

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 thread ]
DCX2, 8 May 2007 @ 7:48am

Re:
> Things are not as safe as we think. Hmm... "Your appendix is more likely to kill you than al-Qaeda." It's fine for Boston to over-react to the first one. OMG a bomb. Someone should have been said "uh...guys...they're light-brites. You can call off the bomb squad now" Oh, and let's not forget the ads were up for weeks before this happened. So, if it had been a terrorist thread, this type of overreaction wouldn't have prevented it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Max, 8 May 2007 @ 7:48am

Re:
Yes, the city of Boston overreacted in governmentally perfect knee-jerk fashion. It's also quite disingenuous to use VT as an excuse for overreaction. As for the "6 isslamic radicals" arrested today in your home state. Let us know when they are convicted. Life is not safe and nobody can keep you safe except yourself so why not take responsibility for it. As well, please explain how a marketing company is supposed to know that citizens are going to react to a sign like a bunch of sissies in the "land of the free and home of the brave"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SomePerson, 8 May 2007 @ 7:54am

riiiight
Boston overreacted? Probably, but look at what happens when you don't react. We have read about all the warning signs in the Virginia Tech shooting. Maybe some overreacting should have happened there.

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 thread ]
Matt Bennett, 8 May 2007 @ 8:04am

Screw Menino
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Casper, 8 May 2007 @ 8:10am

Re: Boston blew up other stuff too
They also blew up a traffic counter (one of those boxes with the two air hoses that go across the street and count traffic).

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 May 2007 @ 8:25am

Re: Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
How about a public hanging for anyone who falsely claims another nation has WMDs, then leads their nation to "war" (occupation) in an attempt to secure private oil interests???

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 thread ]
Beefcake, 8 May 2007 @ 8:33am

Re:
People have been listening to too many of Uncle Cheney's bedtime ghost stories. In the interest of safety, let's just put the entire population of the U.S. under house arrest, with 24/7 video, audio, and health monitoring of all who are confined within those houses. Now we're safe! Oh crap, here comes a tornado. Hand me my gun, Mildred.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RandomThoughts, 8 May 2007 @ 8:35am

Actually, the reset button will probably be a nuclear bomb that goes off in one of our cities. You won't like the results of that either.

Ben Franklin didn't have to worry about that one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 8 May 2007 @ 8:57am

Re:
OK First off enough with the VT card, noone can predict or stop a lunatic from being a lunatic, it isn't possible to stop people like that from going off. Secondly, the Boston thing was completely retarded. There was no "stunt" it was just some signs they hung up that looked nothing like a bomb AND they not only had posted the hanging of the ads on the net long before the ruckus, but they called the police and told them what was going on and where ignored, in fact a couple dozen people told them what the ads where, but it was a good opportunity to scare the hell out of people so the police jumped on it. The police chief in Boston KNEW there was no danger and continued to cause panic long after he was told. As for "Islamic Radicals" endangering our country, we are in fact in much greater danger from the "Imperialist Radicals" that have hijacked the country, and you are falling right in line for them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Deidre, 8 May 2007 @ 9:07am

Re: Re: Boston blew up other stuff too
This law will be a good thing. Besides getting rid of signs and traffic counters, Boston will become a place to send those Canadian Red Poppy spy coins.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RandomThoughts, 8 May 2007 @ 9:18am

And concerning the Boston incident, the word there is that the ads were up for quite a while and didn't receive any attention. Then there were 5 calls placed to 911 within 5 mins. Word is the PR company placed those 911 calls.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bring Back the Cold War, 8 May 2007 @ 9:21am

If you don't like where our country is headed GET OFF YOUR ARSE and vote. Rent a bus, pick up your friends and like minded individuals and take them to vote.

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 thread ]
Chowdah Head from Taxachusetts, 8 May 2007 @ 9:25am

Uh... What!?
First, Shakespeare was right, "Kill all the lawyers!"

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 thread ]
Beefcake, 8 May 2007 @ 9:28am

Re:
Ben Franklin just had to worry about stuff like everyday flu and whooping cough, but since he lived in Philadelphia and not Boston, he was unaffected by the Great Boston Cough Panic of 1802. Little known history-- a traveling health tonic salesman had taken a handful of orphans under his wing. He went from city to city, having the kids go out into the town and announce his presence in return for meals and a place to sleep. He'd been doing this in other cities with success, and Boston was the next stop on the tour. But something in Boston was different. After a few weeks, someone got frightened for some reason and thought that maybe the kids were sick-- there was no reason to think this was the case, but it was a possibility because these kids hadn't been seen in Boston before. City authorities responded by shutting down the streets to horses, buggies, and pedestrians for several days while they rounded up the "sick" children and dumped them into Boston Harbor.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steve, 8 May 2007 @ 9:49am

Re: Overreacted or underreacted?
Yes, Boston probably overreacted, and yes, in VaTech, they should have reacted more.. The reality is that we are all judging this with the advantage of hindsight.

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 thread ]
Matt, 8 May 2007 @ 10:07am

Scary much?
Does anyone else find this incredibly scary? It used to be that you had to actually commit a crime to be prosecuted. Then, after 9/11, you only had to be planning to commit a crime to be prosecuted. Now, with this acte, you just have to do something that people might think is a crime, even if it's not, to be prosecuted. This is the g*** d*** definition of a 'slippery slope'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous of Course, 8 May 2007 @ 10:07am

Amnesia
Hmmm... how soon all we forget. The Clinton
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 thread ]
reed, 8 May 2007 @ 10:18am

Re:
"Damn Democrats creating stupid laws."

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 thread ]
Pro, 8 May 2007 @ 10:22am

Re:
Maybe, but i'd be more likely to believe that Menino made those calls himself - once him and his band of idiots figured out that they could siphen a couple million dollars out of the system and into the police force... "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" is how it works in Boston.

This is what happens when you let corruption fester for hundreds of years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
rEdEyEz, 8 May 2007 @ 10:34am

Re: More frivolous lawsuits
...NO, we need to ban frivolous LAWYERS.

Babyboomers; a generation of whiny feel-good finger-pointers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 May 2007 @ 11:00am

And I don't recall him disputing the WMD claims
neither.

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 thread ]
Nixon, 8 May 2007 @ 11:04am

Re:
RandomThoughts said:
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 thread ]
jLl, 8 May 2007 @ 11:09am

Re:
> How specifically was this marketing campaign conducted with intent to convey false or misleading information?

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 thread ]
JustMatt, 8 May 2007 @ 11:51am

Re: jLI
http://www.dix.army.mil/history/thenamedix.htm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pro, 8 May 2007 @ 12:00pm

Re: Re:
Reed, you got that all right - well said
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shred303, 8 May 2007 @ 12:33pm

Need to enact an idiot tax
Scare Law?!? They need to enact an idiot tax that allows us the city of Boston to be fined for their stupidity. If you ask me, they are recieving too many homeland security dollars. The funds need to be reallocated to re-educate and un-moronify their emergency departments.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Larry, 8 May 2007 @ 12:39pm

Re: Amnesia
Good call. I would be more helpful for the "political" discussions if everyone weren't so..."my team is better than your team".

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 thread ]
takeaswag, 8 May 2007 @ 12:57pm

do away with all marketers
It is the marketing companies and marketing people that are brininging all this on themselves. They need some controls put on them. Remember, spam is marketing. Lets get the marketers back down to a reasonable level. Right now it is like the world revolves around marketing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Clueby4, 8 May 2007 @ 1:38pm

So with Bush be the first one charged?
I hope if this obtuse babbling in the form of a bill, is made into law. Bush and his entire cabinet are the first to charged, with the new law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Se, 8 May 2007 @ 2:04pm

Re:
I like your comment!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seb, 8 May 2007 @ 2:18pm

Re: Re: Killed the wrong bird with a stone.
TV brainwashed viewer, the WMD's were moved to Syria. There in so "regime" in place. You seek a continuation to bloodshed which has always taken place. How about getting some nice edication or something like that and join the "corporatist" yourself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brad Kozak, 9 May 2007 @ 9:09am

Embarassed? I don't think so.
Did Boston "embarass" themselves? Nope. Did they over-react? No, again. Was this a stupid stunt, that probably worked out exactly the way Turner/Adult Swim intended? You bet.

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 thread ]
Pro, 9 May 2007 @ 10:33am

Re: Embarassed? I don't think so.
Your analysis is correct, but shallow. You correctly assess that the marketing stunt worked out in the best case scenario for Adult Swim, but if you would dig deeper, you'd see that the powers that be in Boston had a lot to gain from the over-reaction.

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2007 @ 11:34am

"Unfortunately, it was a joke in the same vein as laughing as you pull a fire alarm in a crowded theatre."

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 thread ]