Sorry didnt mean to sound hostile but could you answer these 2 questions i put before you deflected them and others about B-M not phorm?
1. do you catergorically deny that you have such a strategic plan or partnership with Burson Marsteller related to phorm atm and have never been in touch with them or the pr people working for phorm?.
2. What exactly is the bonus in having a strategic partnership with this company apart from having the odd coffee morning a user already posted this as part of B-M known tactics
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian Smart
One of the most effective PR tools is the “third party†technique, where a firm will hire an “expert†to speak on behalf of a company. People don’t generally trust corporate executives who say a product is harmless (say cigarettes, Teflon cookware or household insecticides), but are more likely to believe the same words from a scientist. And sometimes even more effective than hiring experts is getting average citizens to do the same. PR firms have time and again managed to create the illusion of public support for corporate causes through front groups, such as the CCRES."
Sound familiar?
dont get me wrong but how does it look when you and your strategic partners *cough* are both working for the same company at the same time for the same issue coincidence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking
There are critically important issues of the gravest magnitude out there, some - in many countries - involving life and death situations because of intrusion into personal information by authorities.
|
It is of a critical importance to many people in this country for the simple reason you wouldnt mind if it was the government or police to keep the people and the national security safe (Even if they lose your details ;S)
But for an intrusion into personal information by a COMPANY especailly a dubious ex-spyware company who will sell details to the highest bidder we have every right to be gravely concerned hence some peoples responses as you see here.