Yesterday, we showed you a commercial from Nokia that was supposed to advertise and highlight the new Lumia PureView camera phone's awesome features. Except the example video and imagery was not shot on a Nokia Lumia PureView. The massive public backlash has resulted in an internal ethics investigation as well as a dent in their public image and Nokia's stock price.
The New York Times is reporting that Nokia confirmed the use of a different camera and eventually apologized, explaining that it meant to demonstrate optical image stabilization, not give the impression that it was demonstrating the phone’s camera itself.
"In our enthusiasm, we showed poor judgment by neglecting to include a disclaimer that the video was not shot using a Lumia 920,” said Doug Dawson, head of media relations at Nokia, in a statement. “It was an error and we apologize for the confusion created.”
An error, or a conscious and vain hope that no one would notice? Regardless of the intent, the result is irrefutable. Nokia's stock price has plummeted 20 percent in the two days since the launch of the new phone. That could be because Nokia failed to disclose a release date or price for its new phone, meaning people can’t even choose to preorder it before the next iPhone takes the spotlight. It also was likely affected by the general lack of respect caused by the video. For a company trying to make headway in a market dominated by Apple and Samsung, this was a crushing blow.
That isn't even the end of it. Though the company has since amended the videos to include a disclaimer, Stephen Elop, the company’s chief executive, has asked the company’s chief ethics officer to look into the matter, according to a Nokia executive who declined to be named.
“Stephen learned about the situation upon landing in Finland from New York,” this executive said. “One of the first calls he made was to our chief ethics officer who immediately started an investigation. We are dealing with the situation swiftly, fairly and privately.”
No bueno Nokia.
To be clear, this wasn't marketing. This was lying. This helped push the idea that marketing is all lies, and that's what we in the marketing field (the honest ones at least) always try and avoid. The idea that "marketing" and "lying" are the same thing is bad for everyone, especially those of us who hold the ideas of consumer marketing near and dear to our hearts.
[Original Story via NYT]