Wal-Mart Uses Bloggers in PR Campaign

Lots of stories today on bloggers posting public relations information from Wal-Mart, e.g. the New York Times has Wal-Mart Enlists Bloggers in P.R. Campaign and the Wall Street Journal has Wal-Mart Turns to Blogs to Fight Bad News.

Here's an email I received (1/4/06) after posting a piece from the Wall Street Journal on Wal-Mart's hopes to enter banking:

Mark:

I hope you’re well. I just wanted to drop you a line and introduce myself (and I have a vague recollection that I may have written before, so I apologize if this is repetitive). I’m a blogger myself (I contribute to Confirm Them and Human Events’ Right Angle among others), but for my day job - I do online public affairs for Wal-Mart, working with Mike Krempasky who runs Redstate.org.

Just wanted you to know that your post echoing today's WSJ editorial is making the rounds here and at heaquarters in Bentonville.

It’s always a challenge when opponents organize to attack corporations. The companies always seems to have one arm tied behind their backs when they try to respond, so it’s nice to see folks like you defending them when it’s the right thing to do.

If you're interested, I'd like to drop you the occasional update with some newsworthy info about the company. Let me know.

And in the meantime, I thought you might be interested in another story that we're working on today:

Ever notice the difference between what union leaders do and what union members want? It's a story almost as old as labor unions themselves -- and nowhere is it more evident than the union leadership’s campaign against Wal-Mart.

Last summer, as millions of teachers saved money on their back-to-school supplies by shopping at Wal-Mart, the NEA called for a boycott.

Today, Working Families for Wal-Mart released a poll that shows that even as union leaders continue their anti-Wal-Mart campaign, 96% of union households shop at Wal-Mart and 63 percent of union households think Wal-Mart is good for consumers. (You can read WFFW’s full press release about the poll here: http://www.forwalmart.com/news.php. I hope to have the full poll memo for you soon)

Some more highlights:

A majority of union households (54 percent) say that unions should make protecting jobs at places like GM a higher priority than attacking Wal-Mart. And on the question of whether the campaign against Wal-Mart is a good use of union dues, the best union leaders can do is a split. 44 percent of union households say the campaign against Wal-Mart is not a good use of union dues. 45 percent think that it is.

Overall, 71 percent of Americans believe Wal-Mart is good for consumers and 60 percent of Americans say the campaign against Wal-Mart is not a good use of union dues.

We don't expect to change the minds of the union leadership -- but we'd like your help. Do you have any other examples of union activities that run directly counter to their members' wishes or interests?

Please let me know if you have any questions and if you'd like to be added to the list to receive future (occassional) updates.

All the best,

Marshall

P.S. – Reuters has a story on the poll here. It notes the Washington Times report “question[ing] whether John Zogby had a conflict of interest since he had made money as an expert witness in cases where people were suing Wal-Mart.”

Sincerely,

Marshall

Marshall Manson
Edelman
marshall.manson@edelman.com

My post on Wal-mart that generated this email did not support Wal-Mart, it was neutral, and I did not ask to be put on their list. Now I wish I would have just to see what type of information they are sending out, but I assume it's more of the same.

Comments

[save_the_rustbelt]

A couple of months ago there was a news story about Wal-Mart receiving favorable treatment from the DOL, specifically notice before inspections and surveys.

Haven't heard anything since, but I had suspected that for a long time.

Other than the occasional high publicity immigration raid WAl-Mart seems immune from regulatory action until the trial lawyers get into it.

Makes a big difference if you don't have to follow the rules.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/19/national/19walmart.html?ex=1295326800&en=a9931f302cae5cf9&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

January 19, 2006

Inspection Pact Ends for Wal-Mart Stores

WASHINGTON - Labor Department officials said on Wednesday that a much-criticized agreement that they had signed with Wal-Mart Stores regarding workplace inspections was allowed to expire last week.

In October, the department's inspector general, Gordon S. Heddell, issued a scathing report on the agreement, in which the department's Wage and Hour Division gave Wal-Mart 15 days notice before inspecting its stores....

[cl]

OMG poor little Walmart getting beat up all across the blogosphere... I feel so so sorry for them. Those big bad unions, tell them to stop Mark.

[Nicholas Weaver]

I like how Wal-Mart's idea of what bloggers are for: "Lets try to get bloggers to do hit pieces on unions instead of hit pieces on Wal-Mart".

(Not like I'm a huge fan of unions myself, I jsut find it entertaining).

[save_the_rustbelt]

Anne:

Marvelous, thank you!

[anne]

"Not that I am a big fan of unions myself..." Notice how we trap ourselves in thinking of problems. Wal-Mart is an enormous economic power and the idea that any worker at Wal-Mart will have any significant bargaining power relative to the company without some countervailing power is impossible. So, set aside unions, which Wal-Mart workers do not have, and there is a sure imbalance. "Not that I am a big fan of government myself..." What then? "Not that I am a big fan of litigation myself..." However do we balance the economic power of Wal-Mart? Possibly media coverage is sufficient....

[pgl]

At least, it was not an email from Patrick R. Sullivan aka Roland Patrick!

[Movie Guy]

This may be a more widely used approach than some would imagine.

Nothing would surprise me at this point.

[yartrebo]

"However do we balance the economic power of Wal-Mart?"

Well, the proper response would be to break Wal-Mart into a dozen smaller companies of about equal size. Prohibit them from merging or expanding horizontally in any segment.

This really is a regulatory problem (namely a lack of regulation) and it's about as hard for consumers to fight it as to fight Standard Oil of old.

[ken melvin]

..of the powerful, by the powerful, and for the powerful.

[nate]

two blogs had stuff on this:

http://www.holtzbrinckonline.com/

http://peoriapundit.com/blogpeoria/2006/03/07/thank-you-for-blogging-at-wal-mart/

says...

This post is discussed here, at http://consumerist.com.

[Barry]

Anne, quoting from NYT: "In October, the department's inspector general, Gordon S. Heddell, issued a scathing report on the agreement, in which the department's Wage and Hour Division gave Wal-Mart 15 days notice before inspecting its stores...."

Is anybody here willing to assert that a Clinton official who gave an explicit agreement like that to a company wouldn't end up in prison?