Willow Bend Chick-Fil-A vs The Muppets

[Andara Bledin]

A Chick-Fil-A in Willow Bend, TX has posted a sign with misinformation regarding the lack of availability of the advertised Muppet toys so that they don't have to answer questions about why there are no Muppets at Chick-Fil-A.

Article at Daily Kos

I'm not sure how the chain's anti-gay stance was missed when the partnership was being arranged, but subsequent to some rather public anti-gay statements from the CFA CEO, The Hensen Company severed ties.

Article at LA Times

It's worth noting that none of the articles I've seen have said that The Hensen Company actually pulled the toys, merely that they wouldn't partner with CFA in the future. They also declared that any proceeds coming from the partnership would be donated to GLAAD, which likely is what prompted CFA to not offer them at all.

^-.-^

[ngc_7331]

Doesn't the bible say something about not bearing false witness? Hypocrites.

[Silverharp]

Doesn't the bible say something about not bearing false witness? Hypocrites.

Hateful and hypocritical. Sad

[Nyoibo]

I'm wondering what the legal ramifications could be from this, they're basically lying about a safety issue, wouldn't that be libel?

[Andara Bledin]

There are more details surfacing now that the Willow Bend sign has gone viral.

Article at The Atlantic Wire

The recall is definitely company-wide and the company is stating that it is definitely due to a safety concern.

Without access to internal company memos, however, it is impossible to determine whether the recall is due to an actual safety concern, or is using that as an excuse. The recall was definitely started on the 19th, the day before the Hensen Company made their Facebook posting, but whether that was the day that they informed Chick-Fil-A of their decision to cut ties is unknown.

So, we can definitely dislike Chick-Fil-A for some of the purposes that their profits are being put to, but we don't actually have enough info to know whether it's appropriate to label Chick-Fil-A as liars.

^-.-^

[HYHYBT]

That they won't release any more information is suspicious, though... especially when they've got one of their own saying the sign was correct but was taken down because it caused confusion, which to me are directly contradictory statements.

But it is a bit early to declare them liars for certain.

[Andara Bledin]

Oh, I absolutely do no disagree that they are, at the very least, being coy about the whole thing.

I would be absolutely shocked if the Hensen Facebook announcement was the first time CFA heard about the severance of ties, so they had more than enough time to be able to choose to fabricate a reason unrelated to the announcement and then push it out the door before it was made so they could save face by making it look like they jumped first.

However, it's also not outside the realm of possibility that the designer of the toys was an imbecile who couldn't be bothered to do the most obvious of safety testing on the items leading to CFA deciding that it was less painful to just pull the toys and deal with the fallout from that than to risk the potential for lawsuits because kids do things like, say, trying to stuff two fingers through a hole designed for only one.

^-.-^

[Rebel]

There's also this.

Looks like Chick-Fil-A PR team might be posing as teenagers on facebook in order to defend their removal of the toys.

[Andara Bledin]

I saw that linked in something Gail Simone retweeted.

I didn't really look it over too strongly, but there are a few statements in the article that are, at best, sloppy journalism, so I'm not going to really give the report as much weight as it probably deserves. They claim (with a link that says otherwise in the very URL and the related Facebook screen cap) that Hensen pulled the toys when it's undisputed that CFA did the pulling.

I'll check into it further later today.

^-.-^

[crashhelmet]

I saw that linked in something Gail Simone retweeted.

I didn't really look it over too strongly, but there are a few statements in the article that are, at best, sloppy journalism, so I'm not going to really give the report as much weight as it probably deserves. They claim (with a link that says otherwise in the very URL and the related Facebook screen cap) that Hensen pulled the toys when it's undisputed that CFA did the pulling.

I'll check into it further later today.

^-.-^

I don't think Hensen has the ability to pull the toys. Especially after donating the money they received to GLAAD. They signed a deal, received the money, and the toys were made/distributed. Unless there was an escape clause in the contract that would allow them to have them pulled without repayment, which there very well could've been, it would have to come from CFA.

My guess is CFA pulled them in retaliation of Hensen's stance as to not promote them any further and made up the BS about the toys being unsafe to avoid the political backlash of the reasons behind it all.

[Rapscallion]

I agree that Hensen couldn't pull the toys. However, they pulled the best move they could. By CFA giving those toys out, it kept the story in the minds of those buying there, thus discouraging those who agree with Hensen's stand.

Well played, Hensen. Well played.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

The decision to publicly declare that any proceeds would go to GLAAD was a very slick move by the Hensen Company. Brilliant, really.

They do nothing to sully the children's experience, but also do not reap the benefits of the partnership (beyond the write-off, of course) and put those profits to work countering the issue itself.

^-.-^

[HYHYBT]

Which is probably a reason for Chick-fil-A to stop selling the toys early; chances are, the more they sell, the more they have to pay Henson in licensing... and they wouldn't want GLAAD to get the money.

[smileyeagle1021]

But it is a bit early to declare them liars for certain.

Nope, not too soon at all.
Chick Fil-A Claims Henson Toy Recall Unrelated To Same-Sex Marriage Controversy

I checked with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is usually the one issuing the statements regarding recalled toys. A rep at the CPSC told me that the agency has no record of any recall related to these toys

yup, no recall, so liars it is.

[Andara Bledin]

We can't say of a certainty that the toy recall is related to the Henson announcement. Sure, it's highly likely, but there are other highly likely events that people on this very forum have gone off on, only to discover that the initial reports were missing key details that turned the entire issue around.

I'm quite comfortable in declaring that the timing and verbiage are extremely suspicious.

I am not comfortable in declaring, without a doubt, that CFA has outright lied. I don't know that. And neither does anybody else not privy to their internal communications.

Turn it around; this is the same sort of jumping to conclusions that the bigots themselves use to justify their actions. It's no more right when used against them than it is when used by them.

^-.-^