Jeez, now I can't go to the A&P

[zoe b]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/28/...ody-Lawsuit.php

I just learned about this on the news--Produce Paradise was made in my local A&P--the boys' father is the produce manager--we know the family--thay are nice people.

The rap--what I've seen of it-- is funny, stupid and vulgar--you would never know it took place in an A&P--the name is never mentioned.

In my opinion, the big publicity , and any damage, was caused by A&P suing the boys for $100, 000, 000.

I just finished writing customer service--telling them I'm never going to set foot in the A&P again--and this hurts, believe me--A&P is five minutes away--the next closest supermarket is fifteen minutes.

I am so angry that they brought suit against these boys.

I also emailed the president, Eric Claus, but the email bounced back, so I'll call him tomorrow.

Here's the email of customer relations if you feel inspired to support anarchy among the vegetables

apcustomerrel@aptea.com

Ok, so here's a link to their webpage--lots of information about the whole mess--and I watched the whole video--it's actually pretty clever.

http://fakelaugh.com/fakelaugh.html

Zoe

Edited August 28, 2007 by zoe b (log)

[markk]

The video is indeed pretty clever, and shows great cinematographic skill. I think the brothers are to be commended for the quality of their work and their imagination. And indeed, A&P cannot be identified in the video. As far as A&P's claim of harm from the use of their "advertising materials" - the flier that the kids used is a Shop Rite flier altogether, although that name or logo is never shown either!

I too think that the lawsuit is ludicrous, and last night I too wrote to A&P via their website to tell them this. I told them that I think whatever business they lose will be from their silly lawsuit, and I informed them that I will no longer be shopping at A&P.

Their response indicates that they feel they are completely in the right for persecuting these kids and don't seem to care about losing my business.

Apparently the brothers were given permission by a store manager to film in the store after hours. A&P corporate's gripe should be with that person altogether.

[Curlz]

I got the same (I'm assuming) reply...happy to post it here if people really want to see the attitude that comes through. Hint: they're not too bright in the p.r. department. Firing these kids is one thing, but suing for damages is just complete idiocy, imo. And I told them so. I'm happy to shop elsewhere, esp since the A&Ps in my area are such shabby excuses for a supermarket!

[markk]

I sent a copy of the AP news story, and a link to the video, to a fairly conservative friend who is the mother of two (wonderful) college-aged kids herself to get her take, and it was:

"It was probably their p.r. consultant, feeling threatened by some real creativity, that got them to take action. It is cute and clever. A&P brass should have paid the kids to make a better-quality, G-rated, ad-length version, and then gone after a young adult audience.

It makes me wonder what these people possibly could be thinking when they're talking about suing kids over something like this."

It seems that nobody is taking A&P's side, which I find extremely encouraging, especially in light of my friend's suggestion of how easily they could have turned it around into something extremely positive and attracted younger shoppers as well.

[PicnicChef]

I got the same annoying e-mail back. Nothing personalized. I guess they don't care

[tommy]

"cute"? i would qualify it as "disgusting" before "cute." and i'm not conservative in the least.

it's just so utterly disrespectful to their employer (and ones father's employer?). i'm hoping their lawyer fees don't pile up (they won't have to pay a dime to A&P), but i'm guessing it will be a nice lesson for them: don't sh*t where you eat. literally, in this case. i'm sure they didn't mean any harm, but these things take on a life of their own, and you have to realize that going in if you're going to put things up on the 'net.

if i work in the PR department for A&P i don't think i'm going to send a personalized email to everyone. thinking that a large company would or even could do that is a bit naive methinks. would getting a personalized email show you that they "care"? what would be in it? something like "we are not at liberty to discuss this matter at this time." that would make everyone feel better?

it's also not terribly funny or creative. mixing rap with two white dudes doing silly stuff is sooo 2006. they should be sued for being unfunny hacks as well.

Edited August 30, 2007 by tommy (log)

[Curlz]

Ahh, but that 2006 video IS funny, Tommy! I just took a few minutes to scan the site these kids have (FakeLaugh.com, as posted above), and they confirmed what I thought while watching their video--that the flyer they used was from Shop-Rite, not A&P. That, coupled with the fact that I never spotted anything in the vid that said the name of the store, just re-confirms my feelings about the folks at A&P. You have to fire them? Fine. But I seriously doubt that the video is doing anywhere near the damage that they're doing on their own, so drop that libelous b.s. and go back to being the corporate bigshots you think you are. Or maybe put a banana in your pants if that makes you feel better... (see the video and you'll get it)

Since a few of you asked, here's the text of their email response:

“A&P management’s position on this matter should be self explanatory. Producing a video that intentionally and unjustly depicts our company in a negative light, and utilizing company facilities without management knowledge of the specific content involved, is obviously a blatant violation of our policy.

Accordingly, the company has dismissed both employees, and is exploring legal avenues for the recovery of damages, and the removal of any and all videos about the Company from the website where it has been posted by the individuals.

We will continue to work through our store management, labor union and legal process to bring this unfortunate series of events to an appropriate conclusion, and will have no further public comment while that process continues.

Richard De Santa,

Senior Director, Corporate Affairs

Oh, and A&P, since you're firing these two, maybe you can hire an editor to teach you about closing quotations, strange use of commas, and heinous multispacing? Maybe I'm just picky. And I'll pick my produce elsewhere, thankyouverymuch.

Decide for yourselves...I certainly have.

[jgm]

To file a lawsuit against a couple of teenagers is just harassment. Even if you win, how are you going to collect?

Disgusting.

Fire them if you want, but the lawsuit is completely overboard.

[tommy]

Oh, and A&P, since you're firing these two, maybe you can hire an editor to teach  you about closing quotations, strange use of commas, and heinous multispacing? 

actually, it read well to me. looks fine.

it occurs to me that the name of the store need not be in the video for A&P to have an issue with it. sure, anyone who doesn't shop at A&P (there are millions) wouldn't recognize the interior of the store. but given that even more millions surely *do* shop at A&P, and all A&Ps, like most big chains (big companies who provide fresh food to millions, those bastards! ) pretty much look the same, it wouldn't be stretch to realize that some people might recognize what store it is, even if it's on a subliminal, or unconscience level. the fact that they didn't flash "A&P" on the screen doesn't mean that people don't know what store it is.

prediction: after about 2 weeks no one will care, and very few will change their shopping habits, even though a post upthread suggests (after what i would consider a very small sampling of opinions...like, 3) that "seems that nobody is taking A&P's side". wrong. i am. perhaps there's a precedent being set here: i bet a lot more people over the next 20 years (this whole Youtube thing is newish, and God knows it gives too many idiots too much exposure--pun excused please) will think twice about using their employer's property to piss on their employer's produce (ah yes, it was bought elsewhere, but that's beside the point). and that, of course, is the point.

pissing on food, or suggesting that people who are ultimately in control of the food we feed our families do, is wrong, and not funny. the licking of the food is not right and not funny. suggesting that cut fruit is "nasty shit" is not funny, but right. i don't care where it is, what store it's in, or if it's in your own kitchen. video tape yourself pissing in your fridge? guess what... it's not funny. it's disrespectful to everyone who eats food and everyone who doesn't have enough food to eat. and the video is simply not funny. i am the arbiter of funny when it comes to fruits in pants, and pissing on vegetables, afterall.

i will confess that taking the whole "little guy against the big ugly corporation" is a very easy road to take, which is certainly one of the reasons i'm not interested in taking it. poking holes in weak arguments is also fun.

advice to those young "boys": go to school guys, make funny videos, have a good time, drink beer, get high, make people laugh. but don't do it on your employer's property. trust me, you'll look back on this and realize you were wrong. but again, in a few weeks it really won't matter, other than you being SUPERSTARS on campus...even more than that iPhone cracking kid (who should have used a banana in his pants to crack the iPhone because wow, banana in the pants = comedic gold).

without the licking of food that you and your family might buy, and without the pissing, i wouldn't have an issue with this video (and it would have been more funny). i'm guessing A&P probably feels the same way. and i bet they would feel better if those "boys" took it down from youtube and their website, as apparently was requested, while they all make nice-nice. i guess that didn't happen.

i do like the beginning though where they say "drop the beet". c'mon, that's some funny stuff!

Edited August 31, 2007 by tommy (log)

[Curlz]

Oh, and A&P, since you're firing these two, maybe you can hire an editor to teach  you about closing quotations, strange use of commas, and heinous multispacing? 

actually, it read well to me. looks fine.

That's because I fixed the spacing. The other items are b/c I'm picky.

pissing on food, or suggesting that people who are ultimately in control of the food we feed our families do, is wrong, and not funny.  the licking of the food is not right and not funny.  suggesting that cut fruit is "nasty shit" is not funny, but right.  i don't care where it is, what store it's in, or if it's in your own kitchen.  video tape yourself pissing in your fridge?  guess what... it's not funny. it's disrespectful to everyone who eats food and everyone who doesn't have enough food to eat.  and the video is simply not funny.  i am the arbiter of funny when it comes to fruits in pants, and pissing on vegetables, afterall.

i will confess that taking the whole "little guy against the big ugly corporation" is a very easy road to take, which is certainly one of the reasons i'm not interested in taking it.  poking holes in weak arguments is also fun.

advice to those young "boys":  go to school guys, make funny videos, have a good time, drink beer, get high, make people laugh.  but don't do it on your employer's property.  trust me, you'll look back on this and realize you were wrong.  but again, in a few weeks it really won't matter, other than you being SUPERSTARS on campus...even more than that iPhone cracking kid (who should have used a banana in his pants to crack the iPhone because wow, banana in the pants = comedic gold).

without the licking of food that you and your family might buy, and without the pissing, i wouldn't have an issue with this video (and it would have been more funny).  i'm guessing A&P probably feels the same way.  and i bet they would feel better if those "boys" took it down from youtube and their website, as apparently was requested, while they all make nice-nice. i guess that didn't happen.

i do like the beginning though where they say "drop the beet".  c'mon, that's some funny stuff!

←

My last two cents... While I agree with all of the above (particularly about "drop the beet" b/c it made me laugh), I still say that 'kids' are always going to do dumb things (see: graffiti, mailbox bashing, etc.), but adults don't need to slap lawsuits on them when (as you pointed out) said kids don't have the $ to pay them, and the business in question hasn't been harmed. If the video had led us to believe that we were seeing undercover shots of actual A&P employees doing stuff to the produce, that might be a different story. This is obviously kids thinking they were funny. But they're not. And neither is the corporation.

One thing this did remind me of was that my friend Jim W. used to refer to the A&P near our campus as (ready?) the Aim & Pee. It was funny then, and it's even funnier now!

[ghostrider]

. . .Producing a video that intentionally and unjustly depicts our company in a negative light, and utilizing company facilities without management knowledge of the specific content involved, is obviously a blatant violation of our policy. . . .

←

So, they wouldn't have an issue with a video that justly depicts the company in a negative light?

Food for thought.

Edited September 1, 2007 by ghostrider (log)

[hitmanoo]

If A&P has an issue with the video in that it depicts A&P in a negative light, that depiction only exists if people actually see the video.

The fact that A&P has gone beyond what was necessary by merely firing the employees responsible and gone ahead with the lawsuit can be viewed on so many levels.

1. A&P by drawing more attention to the video by creating such publicity actually supports the video by ensuring that it is seen by a mass audience. This makes A&P both for and against the video simultaneously.

2. By going forward with such a lawsuit, A&P purchases more publicity and advertising at a cheaper price than they could have by utilizing the mass media outlets.

3. A&P should be thankful for the video and what may very well lead to an increase in revenues due to curiosity shoppers.

4. The videographers should counter sue A&P for any increase in revenues that the store incurs within a reasonable immediate time period, as they are partially responsible for said increase due to their participations as artists on this endeavor.

5. Perhaps a collaborative effort to edit and or reshoot the video could be mutually beneficial to both the artists and A&P. A&P could have a potential new advertising campaign on its hands while the artists could use this experience as a springboard towards career in film/entertainment.

In the end, I suppose they will drag this out to the bitter end and come to some unpublicized out of court settlement, making the true victors once again--

--LAWYERS