Canon?.. wtf?

CameraMan wrote in post #18541370
Everyone is trying to save a buck so when the promotion department at Canon wants a photo for an ad on PR or whatever, instead of paying someone to go out and get a specific shot with Canon gear and all they pay someone to sit at a computer and look for public domain photos from free sites. Problem is, as we all know, some photos are heavily edited and then posted on the shallow web (sorry for the pun, been exploring the deep web lately). Why anyone would change the exif data to change it from Fujifilm to Canon is beyond me unless it was a Canon employee who liked the photo and said, 'lets use this one. I can change the exif data'. I don't know...

5D4 image of a bird, duplicate a photo from my Fuji X100S into it using Photoshop. EXIF "changed."

If I duplicated the 5D4 image into the Fuji image, EXIF would be Fuji.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18541229
I still believe that companies, even Canon, aren't going to go out every single time to pay photographers to get some test shots for them to promote models . . .

No, of course they aren't. . But they could - and should - at least license imagery for exclusive usage. . This would go a long way towards ensuring that their reputation is not sullied by careless image use. . And it's still dirt cheap, compared to hiring photographers for assignments or using employees.

I just looked over Leica's facebook page, and it doesn't seem like Leica is being careless about where they source photos from. . There is no reason that Canon can't give the same care to their branding that Leica gives to theirs. . I am not comparing the Leica, Inc, to Canon, Inc, as I am well aware of the vastly different scale on which these corporations are operating. . But just because a corporation is big doesn't mean that they should accept carelessness.

Big corporations can still insist on doing everything just right, all the time, no exceptions.

.

.

drmaxx wrote in post #18541286
I don't think that this was 'marketing' - some grey boss decided that Canon needs to be cool and be present in social media. He calls his drone and tells him:
Boss: "Go create a Canon Facebook/Twitter/xxx account. Keep it light, attractive and lively. Goal is 50'000 follower after the first month."
Drone: "What's the budget?"
Boss: "Budget? Are you crazy? My daughter has a great FB account and has no budget. You don't need a budget."
Drone: "O.k., I'll pass some of my responsibilities to Drone 2 and get going?"
Boss: "What? No way. Do you think my daughter can get off school for running FB? - Off you go, you'll manage."

Exactly, that's my point.

It is marketing. It's not not accounting, real estate, human resources or fleet management.
Any medium size company has a bunch of cool "in terms" they use. Core Values I think would be applicable here. One of the five or so Core Values would probably be integrity. They failed.
I doubt very much "some grey boss" decided anything. It's marketing and there would be a boss of marketing.
In the current and previous companies I work for marketing and media relations interwork.

An internal newsletter for my current company had an article I wanted to share on social media so I contacted the person who sent the news letter. She asked a few questions and said she would check with her boss. That boss had 1 suggested bit of information to be omitted (instructed to be omitted more accurately) which I did. I'm just a tiny cog in the machine but it was obvious to me, as an employee with no experience in marketing or media relations, that getting approval and who I should request approval from before posting on social media was common sense. This was for a post that would probably be seen by a 100 or so people.

Meh. Storm in a teacup.

Canon should have just said sorry and given the original 'tog a free camera. Easy to turn an honest balls-up into a cheap PR win...