# data[].attributes.headline
It wouldn't let me post the video and visual so here is the visual as well! 

# data[].attributes.subject
It wouldn't let me post the video and visual so here is the visual as well! 

# data[].attributes.headline
Alessandra Domingo, Lily McGinley, Kathryn Nie, Adrianna Tavarez, Alexis Vucci

# data[].attributes.subject
Alessandra Domingo, Lily McGinley, Kathryn Nie, Adrianna Tavarez, Alexis Vucci

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion Questions:

1. Could Cinnamon Toast Crunch have responded better to the first tweet with the pictures?

2. Would knowing that Karp is a comedian known for his stunts make you more cautious about his findings? Should CTC have used this to their advantage in their statements or is it better that they didn’t?

3. Would you eat Cinnamon Toast Crunch again after this situation? Or try to avoid it as much as possible?

https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=0addff5a-85e7-4ed8-80ec-ad2e0003d800

# data[].attributes.headline
Zachary Kelley, Ryan Dorrian, Tara Saglimbeni, Brad Ryankowski

# data[].attributes.subject
Zachary Kelley, Ryan Dorrian, Tara Saglimbeni, Brad Ryankowski

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion Questions:

1. How do you feel about the NCAA responses to the incidents? Were they good or bad? Why?

2. Do you think the NCAA could have implemented more communication tactics? If so, what?

3. If you were an athlete at this tournament, how would you have reacted to this incident?

https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=bc786e68-6413-4403-91df-ad2e0137b667

# data[].attributes.headline
Eva Leaden, Lauren Matzer, Markela Bouris, Sofia Santos

# data[].attributes.subject
Eva Leaden, Lauren Matzer, Markela Bouris, Sofia Santos

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion Questions:

1. Was IHOP alienating their existing consumers by rebranding to focus on burgers?

2. What other communication tactics could IHOP have used to unveil this PR stunt?

3. There has been debate over the tactics IHOP used in this campaign, and whether or not they were successful. How do you feel about this and why?

4. Do you think the IHOB campaign succeeded in changing consumer perception of IHOP? In other words, did this campaign cause consumers to think of IHOP as something more than the ultimate pancake destination?

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qja6qi_vMqNlZeLj9QyVZa3rlqx2ZWs60WhjNXnXPjs/edit?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.headline
Delaney Galvin, Gaby Orlando, Jake Weinman, & Emily Hueber

# data[].attributes.subject
Delaney Galvin, Gaby Orlando, Jake Weinman, & Emily Hueber

# data[].attributes.body
1. There were more failures than successes within this event. How do you think The Fyre Team could have handled their actions differently to save their reputation and not receive the amount of backlash they did?

2. Marc Weinstein, who is a music festival consultant and was involved with Fyre Festival, mentioned advice to the Fyre team throughout the duration of the case and stated that McFarland “was unflappable, but he was also entirely delusional. It was this constant battle, in my mind, between, is this guy a genius or is he a madman? He just would not take no for an answer, and he would not take advice”. What do you think? Was McFarland a genius or madman?

3. Clearly from this case, there was little to none communication strategy implored by the Fyre team. What do you think the Fyre team could have done differently, as far as communication goes, once the hype and demand surrounding the festival became too much for them to handle?

# data[].attributes.headline
Lex DeCandido, Isabella Parmeter, Allison Smith, Grace Thompson

# data[].attributes.subject
Lex DeCandido, Isabella Parmeter, Allison Smith, Grace Thompson

# data[].attributes.body
1. Do you think Lori Loughlin will be able to have a career comeback after this case?

2. Do you think the fines + sentencing were fair or should they have faced harsher consequences?

3. What could the Loughlin-Giannulli family have done (if anything) to have better communication tactics surrounding the incident?

https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=06c1edf7-429c-4fd8-83cc-ad2f00fe9189

# data[].attributes.headline
Kenya Bailey, Chelsea Columbus, Sarah Urena-Clark, Jennamichelle Merolla, Ethelle O'Mara

# data[].attributes.subject
Kenya Bailey, Chelsea Columbus, Sarah Urena-Clark, Jennamichelle Merolla, Ethelle O'Mara

# data[].attributes.body
1. Do you think the criticism of the advertisement was valid? If so, what could Gillette have done differently in their ad to make it more accommodating while still maintaining their message? If not, do you think the message and mission of Gillette and its larger societal impact outweigh the negative backlash?

2. Had Gillette not pledged to donate $1 million to the organizations do you believe this advertisement would have been seen as performative activism?

3. Do you think it was important that Gillette defended their position and justified their advertisement and it’s message? What was the societal importance or even the societal implications?

https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=84a94b95-a6a4-49ea-a460-ad2f001eb6e6

# data[].attributes.headline
Sally Ryan, Reese Gellman, Emily Edwards and Victoria Howard

# data[].attributes.subject
Sally Ryan, Reese Gellman, Emily Edwards and Victoria Howard

# data[].attributes.body
https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=62ea3fa0-e610-4c14-a672-ad2f00f91be9

Discussion Questions:

Do you think posting or screenshotting one's work on anti-racism, donations or not, is genuine or performative?

Do you feel the shift of activism incorporated into organizations, corporations, and the world more universally has become ingenuine and diluted?

Do you think Abloh's response would have been better received if other communication tactics were incorporated?

# data[].attributes.headline
Maya Boyers, Lauren Fraites, Victoria Young, Prashansa Malakar, Sophia DeLoatche

# data[].attributes.subject
Maya Boyers, Lauren Fraites, Victoria Young, Prashansa Malakar, Sophia DeLoatche

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think the recall of the treadmills was necessary?

2. Do you think that they would have received less backlash had The CEO responded sooner to the incident?

3.  Was the CEO’s letter of apology too little too late?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17jZ5UZ61NnNYkS7Mp-4JCH4gCEvj5_am/view

# data[].attributes.body
1. Could Cinnamon Toast Crunch have responded better to the first tweet with the pictures?
I think that Cinnamon Toast Crunch could have handled the matter privately, asking Karp to message them directly. Then it would not have been such a huge deal.

2. Would knowing that Karp is a comedian known for his stunts make you more cautious about his findings? Should CTC have used this to their advantage in their statements or is it better that they didn’t?
Knowing that would have made me more cautious, but CTC would have had to be very careful with incorporating that into their response so as not to come off as speaking ill of his character.

3. Would you eat Cinnamon Toast Crunch again after this situation? Or try to avoid it as much as possible?
I would still eat Cinnamon Toast Crunch.

# data[].attributes.body
1. How do you feel about the NCAA responses to the incidents? Were they good or bad? Why?
Their responses were good and bad. Their timing was great but their tone and wording could have been more sincere.

2. Do you think the NCAA could have implemented more communication tactics? If so, what?
I think they did a good job overall, but that they could have let individuals who were effected speak on the issue.
3. If you were an athlete at this tournament, how would you have reacted to this incident?

I would have been very upset about the blatant gender discrimination.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Was IHOP alienating their existing consumers by rebranding to focus on burgers?

I do not think they alienated their consumers, especially because it was a temporary change. Their rebrand was a marketing tactic.
2. What other communication tactics could IHOP have used to unveil this PR stunt?
I think IHOP used adequate communication tactics, specifically their use of social media was very effective and fit their campaign well.
3. There has been debate over the tactics IHOP used in this campaign, and whether or not they were successful. How do you feel about this and why?
I think they were successful because it generated a lot of attention towards the brand.
4. Do you think the IHOB campaign succeeded in changing consumer perception of IHOP? In other words, did this campaign cause consumers to think of IHOP as something more than the ultimate pancake destination?
I think it might have made consumers realize that IHOP was more than just pancakes, although that is what they will always be mainly known for.

# data[].attributes.body
1. There were more failures than successes within this event. How do you think The Fyre Team could have handled their actions differently to save their reputation and not receive the amount of backlash they did?

They should have been transparent about their lack of preparedness prior to the event.
2. Marc Weinstein, who is a music festival consultant and was involved with Fyre Festival, mentioned advice to the Fyre team throughout the duration of the case and stated that McFarland “was unflappable, but he was also entirely delusional. It was this constant battle, in my mind, between, is this guy a genius or is he a madman? He just would not take no for an answer, and he would not take advice”. What do you think? Was McFarland a genius or madman?
I think McFarland was a madman, specifically because the event crashed and burned. The only way he would be considered a genius is because he succeeded in conning such a large number of people, something that requires intelligence.
3. Clearly from this case, there was little to none communication strategy implored by the Fyre team. What do you think the Fyre team could have done differently, as far as communication goes, once the hype and demand surrounding the festival became too much for them to handle?
They should have been transparent with their communication from the beginning, not just when the hype became too much.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Do you think Lori Loughlin will be able to have a career comeback after this case?

I do not think Lori Loughlin will be able to have a career comeback after this case. The case was too high profile and speaks to her lack of ethics more than other comparable celebrity cases.
2. Do you think the fines + sentencing were fair or should they have faced harsher consequences?
I think that they should have faced harsher consequences considering the extreme harsh consequences non-wealthy people (specifically people of color) suffer for their crimes.
3. What could the Loughlin-Giannulli family have done (if anything) to have better communication tactics surrounding the incident?
They could have immediately taken accountability and apologized, but I understand from a legal standpoint why they did what they did.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Do you think the criticism of the advertisement was valid? If so, what could Gillette have done differently in their ad to make it more accommodating while still maintaining their message? If not, do you think the message and mission of Gillette and its larger societal impact outweigh the negative backlash?

I think the criticism was valid because the campaign felt like Gillette was just incorporating buzzwords and all in all being performative.
2. Had Gillette not pledged to donate $1 million to the organizations do you believe this advertisement would have been seen as performative activism?

Yes, I do. Brands these day feel obligated to comment on social issues, so anything without more substantial support (in this case, financial) feels like performative activism.
3. Do you think it was important that Gillette defended their position and justified their advertisement and it’s message? What was the societal importance or even the societal implications?

It was important that Gillette defended their position because it gave more credibility to their campaign message.

# data[].attributes.body
Do you think posting or screenshotting one's work on anti-racism, donations or not, is genuine or performative?

This is a hard question, because I think posting one's anti-racism actions often come off as performative, especially if that person does not have a history of doing such things.

Do you feel the shift of activism incorporated into organizations, corporations, and the world more universally has become ingenuine and diluted?

Yes, I think that companies feel pressured to incorporate activism into their branding and efforts, making the efforts little more than worthless.

Do you think Abloh's response would have been better received if other communication tactics were incorporated?

I think Abloh should have incorporated more rectifying behavior into his response.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think the criticisms were valid because the campaign felt very tone deaf and felt like they were disregarding experiences of other groups of people.
2. I believe that their actions were definitely viewed better after they donated the money to the organizations.
3. Gilette defending their position was important because it helped them get their points across more better and helped them justify their campaign more in a way.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think that Lori Loughlin will be able to have a career comeback after this case if she stays out of the media for a while and shows rectifying behavior.
2. I think that the fines were fair but comparing it to other less severe cases involving mainly POCs, the extreme consequences that they face, it doesn't seem fair to them at all.
3. I think the family should have taken steps to show that they are regretful for engaging such activities not just being caught.

# data[].attributes.body
1. They should have been transparent about their actions rather than creating more hype around the event.

2. McFarland was definitely a bit of both but not in a positive way at all. He was able to deceive people for a long time and ended up scamming them. He had  no regard and respect for people and did whatever he felt like would benefit solely him.

3. I definitely think they should have admitted to not being able to do the event as soon as they found out that it wasn't feasible. They should have also stopped giving hopes to people at the time when they were figuring this out instead of hyping it up and building excitement.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think it is very tricky to figure out whether or not his actions were genuine. His intentions could have been genuine but the way he executed it made it seem like it wasn't.
2. I definitely feel like among the flood of BLM posts  that we saw last year from brands following the tragic killing of George Flyod,  not all of it was genuine. It was nice to see brands speak about the issue and raise awareness but if its not followed by actions that speak the same then it becomes extremely performative.
3. I definitely think that he could have used better communication tactics in terms of justifying his action, however, overall he did a good job at addressing the situation.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I don't think that iHOP was trying to alienate consumers by rebranding to focus on burgers. I believe that they did this in order to drive attention to the brand and it definitely worked.
2. iHOP did a good job with the communication tactics that they used. Their approach with using social media worked great for them.
3. I believe that they were successful because they were able to boost up their sales following the buzz created after the change of name.
4. I think that they were successful in  changing consumer perception because they were able to rebrand themselves as a place that is more than just breakfast food spot.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Cinnamon Toast Crunch could have handled the situation better by taking initiatives such as rectifying behavior rather than justifying the actions.
2. Knowing that Karp is a comedian would have definitely made me not take his claims seriously.I think it would have looked bad in CTC's part if they used this in their statements because it would almost seem like they aren't taking claims against safety of their products seriously.
3. I would still eat CTC after this situation because I realize that this is an isolated incident.

# data[].attributes.body
Great presentation! 1. I think that Cinnamon Toast Crunch should have handled the situation a bit more privately than they did especially in the case of Mr. Karp. Also, they should have apologized immediately rather than trying to justify what had happened. 2. The fact that Mr. Karp is a comedian, could definitely shed a little light on the situation. However, Cinnamon Toast Crunch should try to keep it as professional as possible and not use that to their favor. 3. I would only stop eating Cinnamon Toast Crunch if this had happened to me personally.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I do believe that the criticism of this ad was valid. Although corporate social responsibility can be effective in some cases, companies also need to be sensitive to how their consumers will view their stance in ads. In this case, I do not think that men need a corporation, especially one that they buy products from, to inform them about the nature of masculinity or reprimand them for not doing enough about the issue. In addition, the employment of the term “toxic masculinity” within the ad, no matter how fleeting, was a complete mistake and seems to generalize this stereotype to all men. It is never a positive move or marketing technique to alienate a large portion of a company’s target audience by taking a political stance. Therefore, the messaging of this entire campaign hit the mark as they could have devised a plan that focused more on the encouragement of good behaviors.

2. If they had not donated to organizations, this advertisement would have most certainly been deemed as performative activism by trying to position itself as a company within ‘woke’ culture.

3. I think it was extremely important for Gillette to defend their position and justify their advertisement, although they should have done more research into whether implementing such a campaign would have negatively or positively benefited them in the eyes of their consumer base.

# data[].attributes.body
1. In this event, I do not believe Lori Loughlin will be able to have much of a career following this case. Although she was such a popular household name prior to the event, the actions she undertook resulted in a tarnished image and loss of trust and respect from the greater public. While some celebrities such as Martha Stewart have been able to bounce back from high profile criminal cases, Loughlin’s was on a much higher scale.

2. Although I believe that the sentencing was fair in the eyes of the justice system, I also think that Loughlin could have faced harsher consequences if she was not such a huge celebrity. The fines and sentencing were also in addition to the huge downfall that her career sustained.

3. The Loughlin-Giannulli family could have issued an immediate apology taking responsibility for their actions and admitting their fault. Not only would it have demonstrated their remorse for the situation, but perhaps the public would have been slightly more forgiving if they saw how the family recognized the wrongness of their actions.

# data[].attributes.body
1. For one, the Fyre Festival could have admitted their lack of preparation and readiness prior to the event rather than allow hundreds of people to fly to the island to find the opposite of what they were expecting. They should have refunded all of the participants rather than continue to deceive them through social media .

2. McFarland is certainly not a genius, but he is also not a madman. This case showed the narcissistic and scamming behaviors of an individual who was only looking to make a profit no matter how many he had to deceive. Not only did he refuse to listen to advice, but he was only focused on lining his pockets.

3. As far as communication goes, the Fyre Festival team should have issued a statement the moment they knew the event was not going to succeed and actually take place. Not only did this entire event seem like a scam, but it was also a huge waste of people’s time and money. Therefore, the team should have issued an apology alerting people to the change immediately.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I believe that the recall of the treadmills was absolutely necessary in this case. As you stated, they had recalls and lawsuits in the past, but the death of a child from their product served as a catalyst for this necessary action. While the death of the child damaged their reputation, companies should be more focused on people and their wellbeing rather than making a profit off of a faulty and hazardous piece of gym equipment.

2. Although I think the company may have received less backlash had the CEO responded sooner, Peloton would have been acknowledging their guilt and wrongdoing in the matter. However, given the death of a child was at the center of this case, the company should and would have faced backlash no matter how fast the response time.

3. Given the trickiness of this situation, the CEO would have been expected to apologize no matter what. In any crisis situation, the timing of a message is extremely important to safeguarding a company’s reputation. However, the response was too little too late, especially with a death at the hands of one of the company’s products.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I do not believe that IHOP was alienating their existing consumers by rebranding. Change is part of the success of any company and IHOP was only trying to expand its offerings to attract even more customers. Although some of the loyal consumers of the brand may have initially been confused by the rebranding campaign, I believe the company did a fair job at trying to attract both a passive and active audience.

2. Leading up to the name change, IHOP did disseminate a teaser campaign and they did a great job in building up buzz over social media for the publicity stunt. In addition, they also conducted exclusive events and burger tastings around the country as well as run TV and print ads. Their tactics were ultimately successful given the buzz it generated as well as the subsequent sales and impressions from the campaign.

3. I think that IHOP could have ultimately skipped the name change during this campaign. Although they were trying to garner as much buzz and engagement as possible, it did also create some initial confusion in people.

4. Personally, I have always associated IHOP with the “ultimate pancake destination”. Although it might have initially caused consumers to think of the company differently, I think it will forever be linked to its initial brand positioning.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Although the timing of the NCAA’s response was quick and efficient, the substance of its language came across as insincere. This situation could have been avoided if the NCAA did not continue to perpetuate gender disparities in sports.

2. In terms of communication tactics, the NCAA utilized face-to-face, organizational media, and news media. They acknowledged the gender inequality made apparent through the men and women’s basketball championships through their tactics.

3. If I had been an athlete at this tournament, I would have been extremely outraged and upset by the obvious gender disparity. I would have most likely also taken to social media to express my frustration and shine light on the situation as well as contacted the NCAA about the obvious lack of following the Title IX guidelines.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Cinnamon Toast Crunch could have responded better to the first tweet. Although an apology and sending him new boxes of cereal were steps in the right direction, they should have done more to address the situation. Instead of debating the claim, they could have taken actions to show how their cereal is packaged or rectifying their behavior through compensation for the incident.

2. If I were in the company’s position, I may not have taken Karp’s claims seriously in the beginning due to his background as a comedian. However, CTC should not have used this knowledge to their advantage in their statements because it could have further hurt their reputation and made it appear that they don’t take their consumers’ claims seriously.

3. Although I don’t really eat cereal, I would eat Cinnamon Toast Crunch again after the situation. While I may be more cautious when opening a bag of cereal to check for any signs of tampering, this was an isolated case and should not affect the overall company.

# data[].attributes.body
As a consumer, I would be livid if there were issues with a product that should be recalled and wasn’t. For the safety of the consumer and the drive for transparency, the recall of the treadmill was definitely necessary.
100%. As we have learned from many PR classes, timing is very important during a case. IF the CEO had responded quickly, honestly, and genuinely, then their communication tactics may have been more effective.
Peloton is basically a household name, so yes I do think the CEO responded too little too late. With a company as big and well known as Peleton, reputation should be the number 1 priority.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, I do think the criticism surrounding the advertisement was valid. The Gillette ad supports a great cause and with every societal cause comes negative and positive comments.
2. I think this cause would have definitely been performative action if they did not donate. They would have received a lot more backlash if they did not donate.
3. I think it was important for them to defend themselves to show they were actually doing it for the good of the cause. The societal implications just shows that its important to teach boys and men to be respectful.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Lori will have a career after this. I am not sure if many people are going to forgive her live they forgave her daughter Olivia, but I think eventually it will blow over in the media and she will continue on with her life. I don’t think it will be the career she had before, but she will make it around especially being a celebrity and still have supporters.
2. I think the fines and sentencing were fair. Sure their consequences could have been worse but I can't fully say what is just in that situation. What hurt them the most was facing their reputation being ripped apart. Being such huge celebrities and even her daughter who is a huge influencer for young girls, their reputation will never be the same.
3.

# data[].attributes.body
I think using social media to post about activism is performative but there are always positives and negatives to it. I can't fully create an opinion whether I think this was performative or not because of the backlash he received, I do think it just was poor on Abloh's end. To understand both sides, he could have just been trying to support BLM and what happened to George Floyd, but people were disappointed it was only $50 to a high end luxury brand.
2. At the end of the day, every company looks to make money. I think their mission has good intentions but I do think companies use it as a tactic to get the attention of consumers.
3. I think his apology was good. He had good intentions in supporting a good cause. The only reason why he received the backlash he did was because of the price. With his apology he took full accountability of his actions and realized he could have done better.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think recalling the treadmill was 100% necessary. They have had problems with their products in the past and especially because a child died, it was completely necessary for the treadmill to recalled.
2. I think they would have received less backlash if they responded to the situation earlier. It would have showed that they cared about their customers if they addressed it sooner. Being defensive definitely did not help their case.
3. Yes, considering how expensive and "trustworthy" their products are, their apology should have come out right away especially because a child died on their treadmill.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I don' think they alienated their customers that much because they were just looking to expand their brand to burgers along with pancakes.
2. I think the communication tactics they used were very effective. Sticking to social media was a great move.
3. I don’t think they had to change their name to iHob. I think they could have just added burgers to their menu without changing their entire brand name.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think the NCAA was definitely quick in their response time with handling the situation after receiving all that backlash, but it shouldn't have been at that level to begin with. I think the fact that athletes, college and pro, speaking up about this should not have been the reason the NCAA made a change. With the weight room, food, and gear bag, it should have all been equal from the start.
2. I definitely think the NCAA should have had better communication tactics. There is still a huge gap between the NCAA and their athletes and letting the athletes make the changes would have been a lot better.
3. Being a female athlete, I would have reacted the same way most women did at this tournament. I would have taken it to social media to spread awareness just like a majority of those athletes did. I would also hope the mens teams would speak up about it too, to help make a change.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. I think Cinnamon Toast Crunch should have handled the situation privately with Mr. Karp. Trying to justify what had happened was not a good look for their brand. After it went public, they should have just apologized, kept their response short, and reach out to Mr. Karp privately. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1. I think Cinnamon Toast Crunch should have handled the situation privately with Mr. Karp. Trying to justify what had happened was not a good look for their brand. After it went public, they should have just apologized, kept their response short, and reach out to Mr. Karp privately. 

# data[].attributes.body
2. I think it could definitely make people look at the situation differently knowing that Mr. Karp is a comedian, however, Cinnamon Toast Crunch shouldn't use it in their favor because overall it will just hurt their brand.
3. I love CTC and will continue to eat it. I feel like it was a situation that rarely happens, so if I were to experience this myself, I would stop eating it.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I would not be surprised if Lori Loughlin is able to have a career after this incident. Canel culture does not exist for white, wealthy celebrities. Celebrities have come back from worse than this, and some people still do not think she did anything wrong.
2) I am unsure whether the consequences were just, but I do know that he system itself is severely flawed. I do believe she was let off easy due to her race and financial status. It is unfair, however, when you look at black mothers in poverty who face worse consequences for doing exactly what she did.
3) I do not think there were any better communication tactics that the family would have taken. They were clearly guilty of their actions and any form of apology would have just been insincere.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I think the Fyre Festival team needed to admit their failure before the event and issue refunds to all participants. They would have lost a bunch of money, but their reputation may not have been ruined. Now, if anyone associated with Fyre Festival attempts to execute another event, they will be blacklisted.
2) I would not consider this guy to be a genius. He is a con artist who took advantage of consumers and thought he could get away with it. I have no idea how the guy got that far into the process. It never should have happened.
3) They absolutely should have cancelled the event as soon as it became too much for them to handle. I am truly confused as to what they expected to happen by going through with the event. It was a disaster.

# data[].attributes.body
1) In some sense, all social media activism is performative. While there are good intentions, and some may be genuine, not all are. To some, posting their donations may be in an attempt to encourage others to do the same. With this particular instance, I cannot tell if it was performative. I do, however,  think that it was poorly thought out.
2) I personally feel as though every action by an organization is in an attempt to make money. While their promotions may have a positive impact on society, their main goal is still apparent. It would be worse for them to say nothing at all.
3) It is not really for me to say whether or not his apology was enough, but I do think it was important for him to not center himself and make a big deal about the issue.

# data[].attributes.body
1) The recall of the treadmill was 100% necessary. Once linked to a death, the product is deemed questionable and risky to the public. While it may have been costly, it was better for them in the long run.
2) I think the CEO should have responded quickly, but not take blame initially.  It is important to not be defensive, but also to ensure customers that the products are being reviewed for the safety of consumers.
3) I am unsure if the response was too late. I do not think the CEO could have said anything to make the situation better, especially since the incident involved a child. It was important for them to address the issue, but they also had to make sure they were truly responsible for the incident.

# data[].attributes.body
This was a great case to analyze!
1) I remember this particular incident and looking back on it, it is actually very funny. The only way I could see this campaign alienating their consumers is by focusing on meat consumption and ignoring vegetarians and vegans. However, I do not feel as though many vegetarians and vegans felt threatened by this campaign.
2) I think IHOP utilized the proper communication outlets to promote this stunt. By sticking mainly to social media, it allowed for some skepticism from consumers and brought more attention to their organization.
3) I actually thought this was a really creative way to promote their lunch and dinner options. IHOP is mainly known for their breakfast foods, so this was an excellent reminder to their consumers that they have more than just pancakes and waffles at their locations. In terms of success, I am unsure. I remember at the time of the incident that many people were upset over the potential name change. After releasing that it was a stunt, however, I think it did what it intended to do.
4) Personally, I was always aware of IHOP's lunch and dinner menus, but I was just never interested. If I am looking to eat a burger, I will go to Five Guys. If I am looking for some cheap breakfast, IHOP is definitely a main contender. In high school, after band concerts or plays, we would all go to IHOP around dinner time and I would still get breakfast foods. I do not think the "IHOB" campaign really changed by perception of the restaurant.

# data[].attributes.body
1) While the organizations were quick in their response times, the tone of their messages came of as insincere. Instead of trying to justify the quality of the gift bags, they should have corrected the issue right away. The incident should not have had to go viral for them to correct their errors.
2) I think the organization could have implemented better communication tactics. This particular issue demonstrated the lack of equality within sports. It would have been better for the organization to not only apologize and fix their mistakes for this particular incident, but set up programs to address sexism within the world of sports.
3) As a women, I would have been furious and would hope that the men's team would speak up. This is a frequent issue in women's sports and it needs to be seriously addressed by major organizations.

# data[].attributes.body
Great presentation!
1) Once Karp made the situation public, Cinnamon Toast Crunch needed to respond respectfully. They could have done more, but they should have kept their response short and encouraged Karp to reach out to them privately. I also feel as though trying to explain or justify the mishap was bad on their end. They should have just apologized and offer something in return. Overall, CTC should have tried to avoid the situation going public at all.
2) After finding out Karp was a comedian, it definitely made me more skeptical of the situation. We live in a world where anyone would do anything for their five seconds of fame. However, CTC should not have used this to their advantage as it would have made it seem as though they do not care about their consumers.
3) I would have continued to eat CTC after this incident, unless I were to experience it myself. To be honest, the whole situation was very bizzare and I could not imagine something like it happening twice.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Personally, I think the criticism surrounding the advertisement was valid, yet overall I think Gillettes messaging promotes a solid cause. I think Gillette could have been more proactive with messaging, therefore their communication would have come across way less as performative activism.

2. Yes, I believe that this advertisement would have been seen as performative activism if Gillette did not donate money. It is all about action when dealing with these scenarios. If you don’t take action it comes across as promotional, rather than actually being interactive.

3. Yes, I think it was important that Gillette defended and justified themselves, mainly because it allowed for them to clarify to the public why they chose to take such a stance. The societal implications focus on not allowing men to get away with being disrespectful, and stoping any excuses that arise.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yes, I believe Lori Loughlin will be able to have a career comeback after this incident, mainly because there are always incidents blowing up in the media, and people always forget and move onto the next one.

2. Yes, I believe the fines and sentencing were fair considering the incident. Also, I am glad she faced consequences in general, considering he actions and the fact that she had the resources financially.

3. The Loughlin-Giannuli family should have never manipulated the process and should have remained transparent. They kne exactly what they were doing, yet it only made the outcome worse.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Honestly, it all depends and can be somewhat hard to determine for sure. In some instances, it may be utilized with the purpose of generating buzz around a brand or actually trying to promote genuine attention to a cause.

2. Yes, absolutely. I feel as though organizations and brands promote activism as a way to not only draw in more profit but attract more people by exemplifying that their brand/organization cares about current events.

3. Personally, I do not think Abloh needed to incorporate forms of communication, and that his apology was enough. As long as transparency is established, his apology made it clear that his actions got confused by the media.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yes, absolutely. If they did not recal the treadmills, pelotons reputation would have been in jeopardy from negative backlash.

2. Yes, if the CEO would have responded sooner to the recal/product malfunctions, negative backlash would have been considerably less. Mainly because it would have showcased that the higher-ups care about the well-being of their consumers and want to address any problems involving their products.

3. Yes, the CEO’s appology letter was too late - considering the popularity surrounding peloton and the cost consumers pay to buy them.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Personally, I do think IHOP alienated a portion of their existing consumers by primarily focusing on burgers and rebranding their identity, however with restaurants I feel as though if consumers are loyal enough they will continue to come back even if the change is implemented.

2. Honestly, I think the tactics that IHOP used were extremely effective. I am not sure if there is anything that could have been done differently.

3. I personally believe that changing the name to IHOB was unnecessary and that they could have just promoted burgers, but kept the status they had with their original name.

4. Yes, absolutely. Before this campaign, I primarily thought IHOP only had breakfast foods (such as pancakes). However, focusing on the lunch aspect of the restaurant (such as burgers) has brought that aspect of the brand to the forefront of the public, and now people know IHOP can also be a breakfast destination.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Personally, I think the timing of the responses was efficient, yet the language was not genuine enough to be taken seriously. The language was more defensive than apologetic, which inevitably brought more attention to the prominence of gender inequality within the NCAA.

2. I think the NCAA could have let the players and those affected take initiative with communication, as much of the hype around the situation was spawned from social media buzz. The heads of the organization should have addressed the situation, rather than the middlemen underneath those powers.

3. Being a female athlete myself, it is sad to say that I was not shocked by this incident, as I have seen so many cases of this myself. Ex: Some Marist men's sports teams were able to use their locker room during the pandemic, yet the women's teams were not allowed to use their locker rooms. Similar to how players spread the news about this incident, I probably would have used social media as an outlet to draw attention to the blatant gender inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Cinnamon Toast Crunch should have kept their communication and response private with the claims of Karp, and they should not have gone public with their responses.

2. It was better that CTC did not use Karp’s comedic status within their statement because then it was much more focal that the situation was a health concern.

3. Honestly, I probably would have eaten Cinnamon Toast Crunch after this experience. It is not a cereal I eat a lot of anyway, but directly after this experience I would have been skeptical about buying the product, but eventually would have eaten it.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yeah people always forget. Especially if she is well connected in Hollywood because realistically a good friend who knows a producer could help her find a new gig. This is just speculation but it seems that well connected people with fame have the privilege to bounce back from scandal.

2. I don’t feel it's my place to comment on if I think the law should work “harder” but I am glad they were able to face the consequences. Especially because they have money they can give up. People have faced harsher punishments for a lot less than this.

3. Seems more sincere but I don’t know how that’d be possible because they manipulated the whole process, they knew what they were doing. They said and did less for a reason.

# data[].attributes.body
1. There was never going to be a success with this event. They knew before people arrived that it was going to fail. That’s kind of the whole point because they could have communicated to the people to not fly to the festival. If they cancelled beforehand they would have received a lot less backlash. They would have saved themselves all the footage of the disheveled site.

2. That guy was crazy to think he could pull this off. He was so money driven he abandoned all critical thinking skills. This whole situation makes me laugh. McFarland saw potential numbers on paper and ran with it assuming everything would fall in place. Little did he realize that a festival takes more work and planning then he made time for; that’s pretty “mad”.

3. They should have cancelled it when they realized there was no chance it was going to work out.

# data[].attributes.body
1. For sure. There was something wrong if people were getting hurt continuously. If there are products that people purchase themselves that will then put them at risk, we should recall them. We can trust gyms (more or less) because the equipment is regulated by policy. A company should do the same thing for home equipment and if it's not safe then it can’t be out there for people to buy.

2. Probably. The defensiveness and reluctance did not help anything. It gave people more reason to critique.

3. Yeah he should have just acted once it was clear there was a risk if you had one. I understand it's a large investment and manufacturing cost but their consumers pay too much money to get themselves hurt.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Depends on how impressionable a name change is on consumers. If they are loyal to the restaurant it is safe to assume that they would still go and eat there because they like the food. On the other hand, a name change can give an impression that things are changing, like a menu.

2. Not sure, it seems like they did a lot of prep for this. They were in person and all over social media. Maybe commercials or billboards but the tactics they used prove to be effective.

3. I think changing the name could be seen as unnecessary. I understand the need for growth and reinvention but this brand has a solid foundation with IHOP. I can see critics just being confused on why they changed the name in the first place.

4. Yeah I do. Personally I never thought of IHOP as a lunch destination. With the name change and all the press that surrounded it, I think many others were introduced to these options as well.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I always feel like powerful organizations and companies come off insincere. I think much of it comes from a lack of empathy. Heads of these organizations are far removed from the realities of NCAA athletes. They might think their allowing of disparities wasn't detrimental but if they were to put themselves in the women players shoes maybe the response would have gone differently.

2. I think they should have let the players take initiative to make the changes. The heads of the organization remove themselves here again. I feel there are too many middle-men between the players and those with the power to implement change.

3. It is blatant disregard and favoritism to the men’s program and tournament. I think I'd be really frustrated after putting work in to see that my sport falls below the mens because it gains more attention.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I don’t think they should have gone public with their response. I get it would be bad to ignore it too, and I don’t suggest they do that either. I think CTC didn’t need to elaborate that far in defense and could have messaged the counter claims to Karp in private.

2. It’s better that they didn’t. Then it opens up a new conversation about where the line stands between a profession and being actually alarmed about something. Like he said, it was a health concern and that seemed to be the primary reason it circulated on twitter.

3. Well I have definitely had a bowl after this incident occurred. I’m skeptical but that is the reality of preservatives in food. These are mass manufactured processed foods that don’t meet the same standards fresh and healthier food do. To me this could be the case with many processed snacks, cereals, and more.

# data[].attributes.body
1. In my opinion Cinnamon Toast Crunch could have responded better to the initial tweet involved in this case. Because this was their first opportunity as a brand to respond on the issue, this response set the tone for the remainder of the case. Sending him a new box of cereal certainly was not enough to right the wrong.

2. Knowing that Karp, the individual with the initial tweet, may have altered my perception of the case. As a situation that generated a lot of laughter on social media, it is easy to assume Karp was honing in on a comedy opportunity. They shouldn’t use this information in their statement, however, because it shifts blame from the brand to Karp himself, which doesn’t necessarily help the brand.

3. This case would make me super suspicious about Cinnamon Toast Crunch. As someone who doesn’t eat a lot of cereal as it is, this case would turn we further away from eating products from the brand.

# data[].attributes.headline
To post your Original Case Study Presentation...

# data[].attributes.subject
To post your Original Case Study Presentation...

# data[].attributes.body
- Be sure you are logged in to Padlet so your post won't be anonymous.
- Click on the + sign in your Team's column.
- Put your Names where it says "Title"
- Click the upload arrow on the left to post the pdf of your visual aid.
Where it says "Write something..."
Copy and paste:
- your 3 discussion questions
- the link to your Panopto video in the Original Case Studies [assignments] folder

# data[].attributes.body
1. I feel like NCAA's response came in early but they didn't seem to be very genuine about it. They implemented rectifying behaviors but their response were also very defensive which made it seem like they weren't apologetic about their actions especially when gender discrimination is such a big issue.
2. NCAA could have utilized other communication tactics such as face-to-face communication and use of social media platforms to issue a extensive apology letter and  mention of rectifying actions they are going to take.
3. I would have felt less valued compared to my male counterparts. I would also loose the pride of being part of the tournament which I'm sure is what others in the team felt too.