Comments on: Nikon’s antisocial media relations at BlogHer ‘09

By: A mom with sense

A mom with sense — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:34:00 +0000

BlogHer isn’t just about mommies. Just because you pushed your snowflake, snot-nosed brat out of your vagina does not mean the world stops to congratulate you. If Nikon didn’t want children and strollers at a COCKTAIL party with EXPENSIVE EQUIPMENT around, that’s their right! Take your child to a more appropriate venue or cough up the cash for a baby-sitter!

By: Ann Seeton

Ann Seeton — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:01:39 +0000

I have found this entire thread to be unsurprising. Our culture is rather anti-mom and anti-child. That this event caters to women and because it does so, it makes welcoming small children a priority is WONDERFUL.

that Nikon’s PR group blew it by failing to recognize the reality of this demographic includes nursing mothers is just another typical goof from corporate america. As the demographic speaks out on this, the PR groups will learn. Sadly for Nikon, they got a PR black eye here.

But attacking the mom aspect is out of line. Just because moms of toddlers chose to leave them at home, doesn’t mean that that option exists for moms of infants who are nursing. The bloggers in question are women, moms, and important enough to be contacted by a company like Nikon–this means that Nikon needs to recognize the importance of accepting that nursing moms who blog are still nursing moms and expect respect.

Nikon clearly intended to make their event really nice. They clearly goofed. This doesn’t reflect on the quality of the equipment they sell–and I wouldn’t let it change my brand one way or the other.

But if they want to reach a demographic that includes nursing moms–then they need to recognize the validity of moms with babies in slings and a diaper bag over one arm–our brains do not turn off when we give birth so the corporations need to include that FACT, and respect our commitment to the next generation as well as our commitment to having an impact through blogging.

By: Meagan Francis

Meagan Francis — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:41:02 +0000

Katie, I think you’ve covered the issue well. It’s irrelevant, from a PR perspective, whether the mom(s) in question were right or wrong in assuming a baby would be invited. Bad PR is bad PR, and things like this have a way of spiraling out of control.

As a mom who brought her baby to BlogHer, I’m disturbed by how many people seem to think it’s not OK for babies to be in “adult” places. We’re not talking about terrorizing toddlers, we’re talking about tiny, immobile babies. I’ve written about this at my blog, too: http://thehappiestmom.com/?p=799

By: M&Co.

M&Co. — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:07:36 +0000

I’m probably going to get flamed for this position, but I would not presume, and do not understand why others seem to presume, that children were invited to such events. I love my children, and admittedly they are older than babies, but if you want my full undivided attention, having my children there for me to chase around isn’t going to do it.

By: John R.

John R. — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:23:57 +0000

I have to agree that this looks like someone in Nikon’s PR or event planning team really screwed up. I can’t figure out why anyone would or could argue otherwise, nor can I figure out why you would find it objectionable for the mistake to be discussed. I also have to agree that a baseline expectation in promotions event planning would be that the agency hired to do it would know enough to hold the event somewhere that would handle the unique characteristics of those on the guest list, and to do the research to know what those characteristics are likely to be. I would not put together an event reaching out to top yoga bloggers at a steakhouse because basic understanding of my audience would tell me that some percentage of yoga bloggers are going to be vegetarians. Not all but some just as some percentage of mommybloggers on Nikon’s guest list were likely to have babies they would need to have with them. I further concur that Nikon should and probably will fire the agency who did this event for them.

By: Denise Rivers

Denise Rivers — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:23:17 +0000

I’m sorry Rick, I thought it was held in a restaurant. Can you point to where this was held in a bar? If it was, another GLARING oversight by Nikon. And the center of the universe mom thing? Show me a child who doesn’t want a mom who considers her job as a mom to be the most important thing in the universe and i will show you the poster child for job security for the psychiatric industry.

By: Jill Walker Rettberg

Jill Walker Rettberg — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:23:05 +0000

Good heavens, where did all the mom-hating come from? I just want to thank Katie for writing this up – it’s pretty obvious that if you invite media to a promotional event you want them to actually attend, and figuring out ahead of time that they’re likely to want to bring their babies shouldn’t be rocket science when you’re talking about BlogHer.

I also want to add that we’re talking about VERY young infants here, who would be in a sling, sleeping or snuggling, not running around tearing down cameras. Babies that young rarely go to bed at 7 pm anyway, they need to be nursed every 3 hours or so, and they’re generally most happy close to their mothers whether their mothers are locked up in a hotel room or mingling with other people. There were, from what I’ve read, at least two mothers turned away, one in the limo (where she brought her carseat) and one at the door.

There were lots of babies at BlogHer and they caused very little disruption. Occassionally there’d be a tiny cry that would be rapidly soothed, or the mother would leave the room. This function was in a private room with a bunch of other conference-goers, many mothers. It’s hard to imagine them being bothered by a couple of women having sleeping babies in slings.

By: Denise Rivers

Denise Rivers — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:18:11 +0000

I am bumfuzzled. take all the entitlement crap out of it. This was a marketing fubar of
EPIC proportion. As a nephrologist (kidney doctor) this would be like a pharmaceutical company trying to get me to use one of their meds and holding it in a restaurant that refused dialysis patients. Yes the target audience (the doctors) were free to come, but the people they were passionate about (the dialysis patient) were banned. Or having a PETA conference at Peter Lugers with the goodie bags containing fur lined sleep masks. I don’t give a rat’s butt whether you want to eat with screaming toddlers or babies or not. If your goal as a company is to reach an audience with a certain passion, it is best to pick a venue that is open and welcoming and inclusive to that passion. And I would guess Chicago (hick town that it is) has at least one hip, uptown restaurant that would be more than willing to take the bucket of money Nikon dropped for this event AND allow a few rugrats a welcome mat. They might even serve a chicken nugget or two, since we mommies are suckers for people who are suckers for our kids. Seems to me that Nikon’s marketing dept is a little unfocused or at worst, uncaring.

By: Susan

Susan — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:39:51 +0000

Katie’s point about it being poorly thought out in advance is spot on. I’m sure the sponsor meant no harm, loves babies and all of that, but it was not the best decision to plan a party for this particular group at a bar/restaurant that cannot allow babies inside. Someone just screwed up. That’s no reflection on the company, the event or anyone except whoever made the decision to have it at that particular venue. Don’t over-analyze the post. It’s just a commentary about the importance of thinking things through carefully. Having been in pr, it’s important to consider every detail, every possible snafu and plan accordingly. I agree with Katie.

By: BlogHerMom

BlogHerMom — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:38:27 +0000

Rick you are an ass. No one is saying that BlogHer did not rock or that it was only for women with children. No one has said that. And where do you get off criticizing those of us who attended BlogHer with our young, often breast-fed babies who wanted or needed to keep them with us at all the events and panels we went to, including the ones that fell late at night. BlogHer is designed so that women with young babies won’t be excluded, like we are just about everywhere else that’s considered a professional setting.

Also I take my baby many places where alcohol happens to be served, like most restaurants where we eat out and to baseball games where people drink beer and eat hotdogs. That doesn’t make me a bad mother. I sort of doubt that mothers who would have brought their babies into the bar area of the upscale restaurant where Nikon was holding that party were subjecting the babies to some sort of risk. Seriously, what are you talking about? Was there some risk that if my baby had been asleep in a sling on my chest as I chatted with people at that party, even standing near the bar or talking to guests consuming alcohol that some terrible thing might have happened to him? That’s just stupid.

Dude, it was Nikon who was interested in these bloggers’ very special position in life as a mother. Nikon invited these women specifically because they are mothers. That’s what made them valuable to Nikon. It isn’t like a bunch of random moms with babies were harassing Nikon to get into their exclusive party. These people were invited guests, invited because Nikon wanted something from them. Which is fine, but don’t act like these moms were some crazy bunch of rude baby endangering party crashers with a sense of entitlement. Also, the mothers who were turned away simply mentioned it happened because it was interesting, which it is. They didn’t raise any hell and neither is Katie.

This whole conversation following this post reveals more about the way women view mothers in our culture than it does about anything else. I can’t believe more people aren’t standing up for the mothers at BlogHer who are being insulted and criticized in this thread.