The case of Chiara Ferragni? “The donation was made, so there is no deception. This affair is a mess that has created a lot of confusion, discouraging companies from doing charity work and greatly damaging the third sector”. Paolo Landi, a communications consultant for companies and co-author with Marco Montanaro of the book ‘Dalla parte di Chiara: Il caso Ferragni e la società incivile’ (Krill Books publisher), does not mince his words and with Adnkronos defends the digital entrepreneur, Chiara Ferragni, at the center of a media and legal storm over the ‘pandoro gate’ and designer eggs. In the case of the Balocco pandoro, Ferragni chose not to ask for the cancellation of the 1 million euro fines, while for the Easter eggs, her companies voluntarily donated 1.2 million euros to the social enterprise ‘I Bambini delle Fate’.
“We are totally against the current, while everyone is against Ferragni, we defend her“, says Landi who explains: “I have always been involved in charity, trying to convince the companies I worked for to allocate a part of their marketing budget for charity operations, especially in emergency situations”.
Operations that are not always easy. “Campaigns against AIDS, breast cancer or for sick children often do not receive a warm welcome from the public. People do not easily buy products that promote these causes,” says Landi, explaining that it is common practice to make advance donations to the receiving organization to ensure a minimum of economic support regardless of sales. “Balocco did exactly this with its donation of 50,000 euros. However, many pandoro remained unsold and sent to the waste bin, which shows that the campaign was not as successful as hoped.”
“If Balocco donated 50,000 euros to the hospital before starting the campaign, it cannot be called misleading advertising.. Whether the sum may seem small or large is another matter, more moral than legal. But it cannot be said that it is misleading advertising because the donation was actually made”. This confusion, warns Landi, could discourage other companies from doing charity work. “This affair has given companies an alibi for not doing charity work anymore. It was already difficult before to convince them to allocate part of their budget to charitable causes. Now, with this case, many companies could back out for fear of running into similar problems”.
Then there is the social hatred. “The influencer who is not hated is a dead influencer. This system of influencers, of being on Instagram and social media, really needs hearts, likes and haters. The influencer is brought to life only in this way. If everyone loves him and that’s it, he dies”, says Landi who however emphasizes the moralistic hatred of the story. “All the Italians who discover they are good, only she is bad, only she is angry with sick children. It’s ridiculous”.
Finally, Landi reflects on the evolution of work. “Influencers prefigure a future in which work will change. We have always been told that all the tycoons of Silicon Valley made billions when they were very young with an idea, without struggling. In some ways, influencers prefigure this idea that you can earn money without doing anything.” They represent a new way of advertising that challenges the old spots of advertising agencies. “Influencers are not interesting for what they say, but for what they prefigure, what will happen in the world,” he concludes.
#Ferragni #case #defense #speaks #expert #defends #Chiara
