And all that hard work can be shot to Hell in the blink of an eye by one bad experience at a drive-thru window.

This morning, my daugther got a late start, and as a result, we didn’t have time to prepare her sack lunch. No big…school is not far away from the Captain Digital Secret Lair. Mrs. Digital prevailed upon me to stop by a fast food emporium, find something relatively nutritious, and take it up to her. The school encourages parents to eat with their children from time to time, so I thought I’d kill two birds with one stone, and get lunch for both of us.

I pulled into a local fast food outlet which could remain nameless (except that I believe in full disclosure – it was Burger King). I ordered our meals at the display that has the mic/speaker combo that must have been Korean War surplus – audio fidelity is to a fast food window what an accordion is to a symphony orchestra. I placed my order. The order taker on the other end of the tin can/string contraption read back the order, and got it wrong. No big – not like that’s the first time. I repeated the order. She got it wrong again. I corrected her, and read the entire order. I was instructed to pull up to the second window. Fair enough.

When I got to the window, she again asked me if I wanted drinks. I said, yes, as I told you before, I want  a Coke and a Pink Lemonade. (My daughter’s a 10 year old. Guess which one of us likes pink lemonade.)

The lady (speaking strictly genetically – she was to quickly prove she was NOT a lady in the chivalric sense of the word) said, “You don’t need to get rude with me! I don’t have to take that kind of s**t off you!”

Huh? All I said was that I’d already given her my drink order (three times, in fact) and that I wanted to make sure that she got our order right. I’d not been sarcastic, rude, or made any kind of confrontational, non-verbal communications that would give her any reason or justification whatsoever to go Medieval on me.

I said, “Look, I don’t want any trouble…I just want my food.” Again, she took the opportunity to ratchet things up exponentially. Again she cursed. Again she threatened.

At that point, I’d had enough. I asked to see the manager. When he appeared at the window, I said, “Look. I don’t appreciate being cussed out at a drive-thru window, and I doubt seriously that Burger King would approve of this either. I’ll give you a choice…you can discipline your employee in front of me right now, or I can call the zone office and ask them to have her fired – your choice.” (I’m normally a pretty even-keeled guy in public, but I don’t put up with service employees getting abusive with me, especially when I’ve done nothing to justify their behavior.)

The woman in question slammed some things around inside, and proclaimed, “I don’t need this “s**t…I’m outta here…I quit!”

I looked at the manager who perhaps saw his entire fast food career going up in flame-broiled customers, and said “well…it looks like that problem may have taken care of itself.”

In fairness to the manager, he did what you would expect a manager to do – apologize profusely, take personal responsibility, assure the customer that this incident was both unacceptable to him and the company, as well as an isolated one. In short, he did everything he could to pour oil on the troubled waters and smooth things over as best he could. He related that they’d just put in a new cash register system and everyone was stressing out over it.

I sympathized with him, but the simple fact of the matter is, employees can never take their own frustrations out on customers, unless the company is willing to turn customers into both ex-customers and evangelists who’s sole mission in life is to counteract every bit of positive image and goodwill the company has earned over their years in business.

So, to recap, Burger King spends millions on advertising to present a kind of “out there,” tongue-in-cheek image, one that is at the same time hip and doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Their entire image was cratered by one employee with anger management issues and a less-than-firm grasp on how to prevent frustration from having a negative impact on customer retention.

Think about that. Millions of dollars spent to get people like me to go to Burger King, and every dime of it wasted by one bad employee.

Ouch.

Because the manager dealt with the problem quickly and appropriately, Burger King hasn’t lost a customer. However, the experience has left a bad tast in my mouth, and that’s not a good thing, especially if you’re peddling fast food. It takes a lifetime to build a good reputation, and only a second or two to torpedo it. Bad news spreads at the quantum speeds – good news takes it’s own sweet time.

I’d say the King has received not a mortal wound, but at the very least a black eye. The thing is, Burger King has blown a ton of good will. Now I’m in the “show me” state of mind, where I will take every bit of their advertising with a very large grain of salt-substitute. Their image ran smack dab up against their reality, and reality won.

What this means for you is that no matter how carefully you craft a marketing campaign, customers are not won by CPMs. They are won, one at a time, and if a prospect’s or customer’s experience does not meet their expectations set by the marketing campaign, the marketing campaign will fail. Every time. That means that it’s absolutely essential to have every employee recognize how essential they are to the success of every marketing message. For they have the power to negate your marketing message, without spending so much as one thin dime.

Ford has a better idea.

Quality is Job One.

Have you driven a Ford lately?

Drive One.

Um…yeah. Each slogan was a reaction to market conditions. “Ford has a better idea” was a reaction to the perception that Ford had become creatively bankrupt. “Quality is Job One” attempted (unsuccessfully) to make the claim that Ford was obsessed with quality. (I owned one. They weren’t.) “Have you driven a Ford lately?” was a lovely little rhetorical question with an implied closed caption – “Look…we’re sorry about all that crap we tried to sell you back in the 70′s. Give us another chance. Really.” Today, Ford’s slogan is “Drive One,” as much a command as it is a plaintive wail in the wilderness of low sales, crap design, bad management, and labor contracts destined to kill what Ford themselves doesn’t mismanage into obscurity.

As if they don’t have enough to worry about, now comes Flash of Genius, the (somewhat dramatized/mostly accurate) story of private inventor Robert Kearns, the inventor of the delay wiper. Ford, along with the rest of the “Big Three,” and most of the rest of the automotive world decided to ignore Kearns patents and simply dare him to sue them over his invention. Kearns eventually beat Ford (and Chrysler) in court, but the fight cost him his marriage, his health, and his sanity.

This movie could be yet another serious black eye for a company that has few parts of it’s body corporate left unharmed. Their response? Apparently, it’s to bury their heads in the sand. Their P.R. princes have decreed that there is no reason to respond (to a movie that equates Ford with Evil Incarnate in Corporate form), as “this case was already settled in court.”

Um…not so much.

It’s now being tried in the Court of Public Opinion. Of the two, the one that can be fatal is the Court of Public Opinion. You can appeal your way out of our legal system. Public Opinion is a much harsher mistress. No appeal. No reversals. No hope. If this movie captures the imagination of the public (no sure bet, to be certain), you’ll see Ford’s sales spin into a death spiral faster than you can say “Edsel.”

I’ve not yet seen the movie, but I followed the case in the press. Ford could have settled over and over and over again. All Kearns insisted on was an admission that it was his idea. Not unreasonable, if you ask me…after all, it WAS his idea. Ford wouldn’t budge. That’s corporate myopia at it’s worst.

If Ford was smart (which today is a lot like saying, “if Congress did it’s job”), they’d meet this movie head on, and divorce themselves from the clowns that were running Ford back in the day. Sadly, the guys at the wheel today seem to be even more clueless than those back in the 60s and 70s. WIth schmarts like this, “Have you driven a Ford lately,” is likely soon to be a question asked only of those who treasure antique autos, for Ford will join such big thinkers like Oldsmobile, Plymouth, American Motors, Studebaker, and Packard on the scrap heap of automotive history.

In recent years, we’ve seen spin that would make a top envious from organizations like the tobacco growers, automobile makers, and scads of politicians (who virtually invented spin). Last night, I saw a TV spot for a group that has decided to take spin to a new level, proactively seeking to change the hearts and minds of the great unwashed before they even get their hackles up regarding the group’s product.

Know much about sweeteners? If you like sweets, sodas, bread products, or cereals and think sugar (cane sugar or beet sugar) is a major part of your diet, think again. Most foods today use what’s called High Fructose Corn Syrup (a.ka.: HFCS) as their sweetener of choice, instead of cane or beet sugar. Why? It’s cheaper and easier to transport than cane or beet sugars. Recently, a number of groups have raised questions about HFCS and health issues. These concerns have not yet gotten a lot of traction in the media or penetrated the conciousness of the general public. Which makes the nationwide TV/Web campaign currently being mounted by the Corn Refiners Association really interesting.

Before we go any farther, let me get a couple of things out of the way, in the spirit of full disclosure. I love soft drinks. I don’t drink diet drinks (I hate the after-taste), and while I try and watch what I eat (sort of) I’m not a crusader against food additives, genetically modified foods, irradiated foods, or anything else. If there’s something to concerns about HFCS, I’d like to know about it, but until I see some proof, I’m not up in arms about this. I’m not concerned about HFCS, aspartame, Olestra, saccharin, or anything else the scaremongers would have me believe will kill me.

Having said that, my big gripe about HFCS is that it doesn’t taste as good as cane sugar, at least in my vice-of-choice, Coca-Cola. In fact, I’ve taken to buying what we refer to around here as “Mexican Cokes” – Coca-Cola that’s bottled South of the border, where for some reason, they still use cane sugar.

Cane sugar has a ‘bite’ to it that HFCS just doesn’t have. Cokes made with HFCS taste better. Given that they are also more expensive, I drink fewer cane sugar Cokes, which is a happy thing for me and my wasteline. (Pun intended. A waist is a terrible thing to mind.)

Since I hit my fifth decade on Planet Earth, I’ve begun paying more attention to what I put in my body. I’m a believer in the idea that the less you screw around with additives and processing, the better off you are, at least in general. Given that cane sugar Cokes taste better, drinking fewer HFCS Cokes was an easy decision. What’s somewhat worrisome for me, though, is that some of the groups hitting the alarm button (including the USDA) claim that studies show that HFCS could be contributing cause of the increase in reported cases of diabetes. Since I have a number of friends that have been stricken with diabetes (and if you count all the diabetes products commercials on TV, I’ve got to believe that diabetes control is a growing business), this is worrisome. Of course if you want to eliminate HFCS from your diet – good luck. Fountain drinks aren’t available with cane sugar. Cake mixes, breakfast cereals, and thousands of other products are made with good old HFCS. You can run from HFCS, but I don’t think you can hide.

HFCS is big business for “Big Corn.” Aside from the windfall from the recent, misguided push towards using corn to make Ethanol, corn growers make big bucks from crops destined for HFCS production. (For every winner there must be a loser – sugar producers are taking it in the shorts as manufacturers move away from cane sugars and towards HFCS.)

So I suppose it’s logical that the Corn Refiners Association has come out, guns blazing, to convince people that HFCS is a beneficial, safe way to sweeten foods. And what better way to do so than with a TV campaign rife with a wholesome girl-next-door, a somewhat dense and inarticulate boyfriend, and a phallic symbol?

In the spot entitled “Two Bites,” we see a young, attractive couple on a picnic. The girl (we’ll call her “Eve”) proffers a juicy, red Popsicle to her guy. He resists, saying “that’s got high fructose corn syrup in it…and you know they say about that!” She smiles her knowing smile, professes ignorance of what “they” say. He fumbles about for a bit, not able to recall what “they” say, either (but he knows it was bad). In her best Socratic manner, asks “What? That it’s made from corn? That it has the same calories as sugar, and honey, it’s fine in moderation!” The guy (we’ll call him “Adam”) responds, “You only brought one?,” and happily accepts the treat, dripping with HFCS and symbolism, from his temptress girlfriend. The spot then ends with a tagline: “Get the facts…you’re in for a sweet surprise.” along with a URL for SweetSurprise.com, where you can learn “factual information about common sweetners like sugar, honey, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).”

The spot accomplishes a number of things you learn in P.R. 101:

1. Confront the problem – HFCS is starting to get a bad rep. The spot acknowledges this.
2. Don’t give credence to the problem by explaining it – The spot cleverly mentions the idea that HFCS is somehow ‘bad’ – but never offers any details or evidence that it is, thus discrediting it by discrediting the person in the spot espousing that opinion.
3. Explain your position/state your claims in a simple, factoid fashion – The spokesbabe cleverly works her three talking points into her answer – it’s natural (made from corn), just as sweet – and no sweeter – than (cane) sugar, and okay to eat in moderation.
4. Offer a tease/call to action to provide more ‘facts’ to buttress your argument – the URL and tag line lead the viewer to believe that they’ll be ‘rewarded’ when they learn the ‘truth’ about HFCS.

The site offers a number of things – a quiz, access to the media campaign, and a FAQ that is heavy on pro-HFCS data, but conveniently skirts any mention of a connection between HFCS and diabetes.

Is HFCS a danger to public health and a cause of diabetes? I dunno. I’m not a scientist. However, I’d like to know more – a lot more – about this, and not just take the word of an organization that has a vested interest in convincing me that HFCS is a safe alternative to cane and beet sugars.

In the spirit of providing as much information as possible, here are some links I found by searching Google for “high fructose corn syrup”:

The Murky World of High-Fructose Corn Syrup

WestonaPrice.org article on the “Double Danger of HFCS

Mayo Clinic article on HFCS

LA Times article on HFCS

WaPo article on HFCS

SF Chronical article on HFCS

www.sprol.com

http://www.sweetsurprise.com

I’d suggest you read what you can, and then make up your own mind HFCS. No matter what you hear, or who you listen to, remember that everybody has an agenda. (Mine is to talk about marketing and how it relates to the world in which we live.)

Getting back to the matter at hand, kudos to the lobbyists, PR team, and marketers behind Big Corn. They’ve crafted a campaign that doesn’t miss a trick, and worked proactively to try and shut down the arguments against HFCS before they get enough play in the news to become a danger to their profits. That’s the way to use marketing effectively. Is that an ethical use of marketing? I don’t know. If HFCS is proved to be safe – yes, it is. If not, there’s gonna be a whole bunch of marketers burning in Hell, come the judgement day.