Text b. The Best Known Brand

Companies sometimes have to handle negative publicity when things go wrong. A firm may accidentally contaminate a product during production, in such cases they have to recall the product and withdraw it from supermarket shelves. Unfortunately a product may be the victim of product tampering. This is where people damage it in some way and then make false claims. This may be to get money from the manufacturers of a brand or the store where it is sold - or else simply for media attention. A sad fact is that when such stories are reported they often cause a wave of copycat behaviour.

Gerber is one of the best known brands of baby food products in the United States, so when, twenty years ago, pieces of glass were discovered in its fruit juice, it immediately recalled 550,000 jars. However, the negative publicity saw sales of Gerber products fall by 4%. So when, two years later, there were over 200 complaints concerning glass in its baby food, Gerber management decided to try and keep everything as quiet as possible. An inspection of 36,000 jars showed that even the largest pieces of glass were so small that they were practically invisible. As the glass appeared harmless, a recall seems unnecessary and unjustified. Many believed that the glass had not been the fault of production but that publicity seekers had deliberately put it in the food. Maybe if Gerber's reputation hadn't been damaged by the juice incident, they would have issued a product recall. But this time they made the mistake of trying to keep quiet and released a storm of media criticism,

Legally Gerber bad acted in good faith and saw itself as the victim. They could point to their quality manufacturing process and high standards. If a flaw had been found in their process, they would have immediately corrected it. Ethically the situation was more complicated. Babies are innocent and helpless and Gerber bad built its reputation on providing them with the safest and highest quality products. Gerber should have been seen to do everything in its power to prevent the mouths of babies being cut. At the very least the company should have responded publicly with their side of the story. If Gerber had handled the media better, it would have avoided much of the negative publicity.

By contrast, Pepsi provides an excellent example in how to deal with a product tampering crisis. In 1993 syringes were reported in its products and the company acted swiftly. Cameras went into its plant and filmed its high-speed, high-tech canning process, which is specifically designed to prevent contamination. This was then shown to an estimated audience of 187 million people. A second release dealt with the arrest of someone in connection with the tampering. A third actually showed a woman filmed as she put a syringe into an opened can of the soft drink. It talked about copycat behaviour being responsible. Pepsi rounded off its campaign with a national TV and print advertisement, which thanked consumers and gave them the message that they could drink as much Pepsi as they wanted.

Task VII. Match these terms (1-8) with their definitions (a-h):

1 victim (n)	a) act of advertising; public announcement; notice for goods etc for sale displayed by newspaper, placard, cinema, or television;
2 claim (n)	b) happening, event, occurrence;
3 behaviour (n)	c) decisive moment; moment of acute danger or difficulty;
4 brand (n)	d) manner, bearing; conduct towards or treatment of others; response made in any particular situation;
5 incident (n)	e) mark of ownership; trademark; particular make of goods;
6 crisis(es) (n)	f) act of contaminating; state of being contaminated;
7 contamination (n)	g) demand for something as one’s due;
8 advertisement (n)	h) one who suffers through no fault of his own;

Task IX. Read the text again and find the words and expressions in italics which mean the same as:

1. interfering deliberately with a product

2. remove

3. imitating something someone else has done.

4. damage / poison

5. take back

6. being talked about in newspapers or on TV in a bad way.

Task X. Complete the sentences using the following prepositions:

with for against of for

1. She was discriminated ……… for being a woman in a man’s world.

2. They're prosecuting the factory ……….. dumping chemicals in the river.

3. A minister has been accused ……. accepting bribes.

4. A manager and stockbroker have been charged ………… .illegally exploiting market information,

5. Three car dealers have been fined ……… fixing the prices of their vehicles.

Task XI. Which sentences above from the Task 10 describe the following crimes?

1 damaging the environment;

2 insider trading;

3 unfair competition;

4 bribery and corruption;

5 unfair employment practices.

Task XII. Complete the sentences using the words:

unfair unethical dishonest illegal

1. It was really ……. of her to claim she had experience when she didn't.

2. Exporting works of art without a license is ……….; you'll go to prison if they catch you.

3. You shouldn't talk about your clients' business in front of everyone, it’s ………….

4. How ………! He only got promoted because he was the boss’s nephew.

Task XIII. Translate the following sentences. Match the sentences 1-4 with the situations a-d below:

1. Without exception all staff members are obliged to retire at the age of 63.

2. Ms Spencer was dismissed for poor time-keeping.

3. A further part of the work force was made redundant when the order was cancelled.

4. He had to resign to avoid a scandal.

a) 'I hate to tell you this, but they've laid off even more people.'

b) 'Mrs Biggs didn't want to stop work at all. She was so sad at her leaving party.'

c ) 'Well, apparently he had to quit. It was either that or seeing his name in the papers.'

d ) 'Janet's been sacked for being late all the time.

Task XIV. Find less formal words for: to retire, to dismiss, redundant, to resign.

Have you got equivalents in your language?