Ninja Poodles Local

To paraphrase Dr. Freud, sometimes a snow angel on a Target sign is just a snow angel on a Target sign. I think it goes a bit far to suggest that there's anything untoward about that ad. She's bundled up in winter clothes, which indicates that the ad is clearly meant to look as if her snow angel looks like the Target sign. Sometimes we just see what we want to see, and I'd guess that "Shaping Youth" probably sees impropriety everywhere it looks.

As for Target's response, well, I can't blame them for not giving great attention to a blogger. Where would you draw the line?

My point is just observing the enormous dust-storm that Target's response has created on the internet, and how counter-intuitive it all seems to me. How the original "issue" that Amy had with the billboard is no longer even at the forefront. How the very definition of "tradtional media" is changing.

Target's representative didn't just "not give great attention" to the inquiry--they gave it NO attention, dismissing it out of hand. I wouldn't expect that level of disregard if *I* just phoned corporate, as a single customer, with a concern (any concern).

I can count on one hand the number of times I've shopped at Target in the last few years, mainly because there isn't one conveniently located in my area, so it's not like this is something that impacts me personally very much. I just found it to be an incident worth watching, and am very interested in Target's response. The "common" consumer has been made more powerful than ever by the Information Age.

Whether or not the add is offensive to women really is a personal belief. Personally, I don't see it as a huge issue but then again, I'm conditioned to seeing shampoo commercials that have women sounding like they are having orgasms. Desensitized much?

However, Target's response IS an issue because they basically stated that people who blog are primarily useless to them. It amazes me because blogging is a huge "media outlet" and Target is not recognizing that? Also, as for the core demographic....how many bloggers talk weekly about their trips to Target? We're always dissing on WalMart and giving the love to the red bulls-eye....they really don't know who they have offended.

The sad part it that some poor customer service person, paid minimum wage, is going to get blamed for that....when the back peddling starts, someone has to get blamed even though the truth of the matter his that he or she probably cut and pasted it from a standard reply.

all over the country, pr departments are scrambling to learn how to effectively communicate with "non-traditional media outlets". The company statement confirms what I long suspected but didn't want to face: Tarzhay is just another Wally's World disguised in a red dress. Sigh....

"The 'common' consumer has been made more powerful than ever by the Information Age."

That's completely true, and from a marketing standpoint I find it strange that any company would make a blanket statement of dismissal to any "media outlet."

I think this may be one of those moments in life when somebody, somewhere, is wincing and thinking, "Oh, shoot, why did I do that?"

Exactly, y'all. All over the "blogosphere," the rallying cry has been, for years, to eschew Wal-Mart in favor of Target. I've seen it everywhere. But this public insult, however much of it is "real" and however much "perceived," is going to have some impact. Knee-jerk reactions from over-sensitive bloggers? Maybe. But I don't see that that really matters at this point.

Glad you brought this to my attention. I've probably passed under the original sign on my commute - but my only thought is - why is there a Target ad in NYC if there isn't one around. Never noticed the weirdness of it. I'm also a BIG shopper of Target clearance. But that isn't how to handle an honest communication from a potiential or current customer!

Leslie, I wondered about that earlier, too! From the look of a brief search on flickr of Times Square pics, there is ALWAYS a big Target ad there. I guess it's for tourists, huh?

The reply from Target was rude. Who sends notes saying I will not respond to you? I am offended by the backhanded insult to Amy and by association, all webloggers.
And I don't see a snow angel.

I think all these "Super" corporations are starting to forget who brings in their income. I remember at some point hearing some interview about Walmart and how they don't strive for "customer service" although it's plastered on their service walls because it's "convenient - even if they lose a couple thousand shoppers, they have millions more..and even those that aren't satisfied will continue to come back. Why? Convenience".

TXPoppet: My thought exactly.

Trisha: Yeah, funny how when you bankrupt any possible local competition, how "convenient" you become all of a sudden.

Whether a blogger is "traditional media" or not, you'd think that any customer/potential customer inquiry would merit equal attention. Word of mouth is still one of the strongest ways to get business goodwill-- Target seems to have forgotten that word of mouth spreads not just by mouth, but by email. And "core guests?" Every yuppie I know who's connected to the internet shops at Target, it being a "rich man's Wal-Mart." So a person with access to the internet wouldn't be a core guest exactly HOW? It's too bad. They were the only chain store I shopped at. (Note use of the past tense.)

Yikes. Very dumb mistake on someone's part. After all if you are going to send any kind of response at all, it certainly shouldn't be rude! And the blog world has loved Target well......still my fav big box store.

Thank goodness, that cute
Bull terrier is not in the picture.