My knowledge of you and your business practices comes from following you in the media and you and your team’s responses in social media, as well as pages of dissenting opinions.
Here is some advice which may come in handy when deciding how to move forward. I welcome any corrections to my facts, as well as any response you want to make.
Don’t blame others for your own missteps
You wrote in The Sun that “a website has been created to promote the cause of putting us out of business and pushing more than 50 citizens onto the unemployment rolls.” The fact that you have employees does not exempt you from criticism. BP, Halliburton, Café Hon and every other company are not given a pass just because they have employees. Nor can you blame critics for your own business decisions that result in low morale or financial strain. You made the unpopular decision to trademark Hon (and then to inform the media); stand by that decision or change it. Do not put the blame on those who choose not to patronize businesses that make decisions they disagree with.
Stop lying and making conflicting statements
On December 9, you were quoted in the Sun saying “I took ownership of it.” On December 20, you told 98 Rock, “I didn’t claim owne---I can’t claim ownership.” Well, which is it? Opposite statements like this diminish your trustworthiness on anything else related to the issue. You’ve also sent conflicting messages saying you don’t have time nor the legal fees to police the trademark, but you may look into possible infractions, especially ones you subjectively disapprove of. If you clearly articulate your intentions, how you plan to “protect the brand”, who you will threaten with legal action (and why) and who you will not (and why), the public may be more understanding.
You’ve used the media at every opportunity in the past, so don’t blame your current problems on them
You put up an illegal sign. When the city asked you to pay a mandatory fee, you turned a mundane business requirement and turned it into a publicity stunt, mayoral photo op, and tax break. You (quite amazingly) used a media circus to convince a city that you were entitled to exemption from a sign fee that every other business must pay. You now claim that the same media took you out of context and misrepresented you. You are a marketer with media savvy who knows what you’re doing when you talk to reporters. Only after you realized how your comments and attitude were poorly received did you decide you would blame the media for your own missteps.
Stop defending yourself with charities, especially when you admit to profiting from non-profits
You first posted to Facebook and Twitter about your “Charity Day” on Saturday, December 18th, days after a protest was announced and organized for December 19th. The contrived attempt to counter a protest with charity work was blatant and transparent, and it makes any other charity work you do look insincere.
Further, you promote a virtually non-existent non-profit on your website. On your Facebook page, your son says it’s been around since 2007 but you haven’t even gotten around to a mission statement and, to date, haven’t done any charitable actions with the group.
The charity work (or lack thereof) looks especially insincere since you admit to profiting from non-profits. As the original Sun article said, “when a local nonprofit organization wanted to have a Hon-themed fundraiser, she only charged them $25.” You charged a group money to use a concept that you admit you didn’t originate. You also claim that you were only protecting the oval Hon logo with your trademark, but that claim is negated by the fact that you charged the charity for the concept, and policed the MTA’s Hon-themed campaign that made no use of your oval logo.
People just found out about your trademark; just because you’ve held it (in some form) for years doesn’t invalidate their opposition
Most people are not regularly checking trademark and patent laws looking for infractions. You told 98 Rock, “I’m not sure why it’s coming up now.” It’s coming up now because you told reporters how you policed the Hon brand and exerted control over a charity, the MTA and a shop owner at BWI. People didn’t know that you were policing the word until you told them; your actions and words provoked them. Stop telling people they’re arguments are invalid just because they found out about it recently and weren’t protesting outside the trademark offices when you filed your claim. There isn’t a statute of limitations on egregious behavior in the court of public opinion.
Do not call civil criticism of your business decision “bullying”
People have written despicable things about you, and that is inexcusable. Likewise, fans of Café Hon have also written despicable things to and about those that oppose you, and that is inexcusable. There are also many opinions, on both sides, based on misinformation. On the other hand, I’ve seen several astute critiques of you and your business practices. To dismiss all critics as bullying is a gross oversimplification and implies everyone who disagrees with you is abusing you. Such rejection stifles discourse, and shows a total lack of respect for dissenting viewpoints.
You told the Sun you don’t understand why people are mad at you. I hope this list helps you see how you come across to an outside observer. You have every right to protect and defend your business, but those that disagree with you also have rights, and you should make attempts to understand them.
Full disclosure: I have no connection to Café Hon, its competitors or any related business. I have no connection to those that lead the boycotts online and on the street, nor did I participate in them. I’ve eaten at the restaurant twice; I have little recollection about those experiences, except that I thought it was overpriced. I’m a fan of Baltimore
Update
Update (2)
This post is approaching 5,000 hits. Interest in this situation continues to escalate; each day Facebook groups like "No one owns hon, hon" and "Boycott Cafe Hon" are adding members. The Twitter feed @notcafehon is adding followers. Meanwhile, the Cafe Hon Facebook page and Twitter pages have disappeared, either deleted by the user or by the respective websites. Denise Whiting has not spoken to the Baltimore Sun since December 23. This media strategy is confounding, to say the least.
To date, Ms. Whiting has not sent a reply to this letter.
This article may be reprinted, reproduced, or retransmitted in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.
Update
I received a response from someone that works for Cafe Hon and Honfest as a subcontractor. The comment was initially blocked by spam filters due to the obscenities it contained, but it can be found below in the comments section. The commenter did not address any of the points made within this article, and only responded to arguments that this article did not make. At no point in the above article is there any call for Denise Whiting to rescind the trademark claims she owns.
The commenter also pointed out that Ms. Whiting has never sued over her trademark, but did not point out that Ms. Whiting made a merchant pay her legal fees after she seized his merchandise, has charged charities for a concept, has threatened lawsuits to small business owners and has not ruled out future lawsuits. (Ms. Whiting continued to confuse audiences on December 23: She told the Sun she hasn't "profited a dime" off her trademark and is only protecting against copy-cat merchandise. She said this 14 days after the same newspaper reported that she took $25 from a charity that wanted to have a Hon-themed fundraiser. There is, obviously, no indication that the fundraiser was "copy-cat merchandise".).
The commenter also pointed out that Ms. Whiting has never sued over her trademark, but did not point out that Ms. Whiting made a merchant pay her legal fees after she seized his merchandise, has charged charities for a concept, has threatened lawsuits to small business owners and has not ruled out future lawsuits. (Ms. Whiting continued to confuse audiences on December 23: She told the Sun she hasn't "profited a dime" off her trademark and is only protecting against copy-cat merchandise. She said this 14 days after the same newspaper reported that she took $25 from a charity that wanted to have a Hon-themed fundraiser. There is, obviously, no indication that the fundraiser was "copy-cat merchandise".).
My background is in media strategy and crisis communication management, and this incident has provided a fascinating study. I am not concerned with the legalities of her trademark; my concern is how she's portraying and representing her legal rights (and beyond that, her business) in the media and social media. That is what this article critically analyzes: Denise Whiting's initial announcement of a business decision and subsequent responses to critics in the media and social media.
That said, I would like to add one more piece of advice:
Hire a crisis management team
Bad publicity can be very hurtful and damaging to a company. Put on the defense, a company has an opportunity to educate and win over clients and potential clients through media and social media platforms. Given this chance, you and your representatives have failed. Spectacularly, hon.
Update (2)
This post is approaching 5,000 hits. Interest in this situation continues to escalate; each day Facebook groups like "No one owns hon, hon" and "Boycott Cafe Hon" are adding members. The Twitter feed @notcafehon is adding followers. Meanwhile, the Cafe Hon Facebook page and Twitter pages have disappeared, either deleted by the user or by the respective websites. Denise Whiting has not spoken to the Baltimore Sun since December 23. This media strategy is confounding, to say the least.
To date, Ms. Whiting has not sent a reply to this letter.
This article may be reprinted, reproduced, or retransmitted in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.
