by MGM Resorts on October 15, 2017 (Lupiani, 2017). The commercial was set to the tune of Little Light of by Odetta and featured multiple MGM Resorts properties in Las “This Mine” Vegas. While it never mentions the shooting, it was a clear marketing response to the mass shooting. Another video was released on social media ahead of this commercial featuring Twitter users posting about returning to Las Vegas. While some still viewed the hashtag campaign and advertisements released by MGM Resorts to be genuine and in good taste, many others saw it as MGM Resorts capitalizing on the mass shooting. MGM Resorts chief experience and marketing officer Lili Tomovich released a statement defending the spot and claimed the response had been and our promise to the world that strong and “overwhelmingly positive” “reinforces we’ll remain united in the face of 2017). However, many people took to social media to adversity” (Richards, express opinions that were not overwhelmingly positive. Ignoring the negative feedback from the public surrounding the MGM new Resorts’ marketing campaign does not help Mandalay Bay Resort or MGM Resorts repair their damaged image. Benoit explains that bolstering will only strengthen an and organization’s image “offset damage to its if it is accepted by the public (2017, p. 180). Since many people in the reputation” public are not accepting the bolstering efforts, a large portion of MGM communication Resorts’ is not helping, but possibly even further damaging its already tattered image. While not proven, a possible explanation for the lack of mortification shown by Mandalay Bay Resort could be rooted in legal liability. Benoit recognized this conflict of interest in his theory. Benoit Restoration concerns may, admittedly, conflict with a desire stated, “image to avoid lawsuits, and the firm must decide whether it is more important to restore its image or avoid (1997, p. 183-4). There is a difference between the court of law and the court of litigation” public opinion. While Mandalay Bay Resort may be trying to protect itself in a court of law, it
by MGM Resorts on October 15, 2017 (Lupiani, 2017). The commercial was set to the tune of “This Little Light of Mine” by Odetta and featured multiple MGM Resorts properties in Las Vegas. While it never mentions the shooting, it was a clear marketing response to the mass shooting. Another video was released on social media ahead of this commercial featuring Twitter users posting about returning to Las Vegas. While some still viewed the hashtag campaign and advertisements released by MGM Resorts to be genuine and in good taste, many others saw it as MGM Resorts capitalizing on the mass shooting. MGM Resorts chief experience and marketing officer Lili Tomovich released a statement defending the spot and claimed the response had been “overwhelmingly positive” and “reinforces our promise to the world that we’ll remain strong and united in the face of adversity” (Richards, 2017). However, many people took to social media to express opinions that were not overwhelmingly positive. Ignoring the negative feedback from the public surrounding the MGM Resorts’ new marketing campaign does not help Mandalay Bay Resort or MGM Resorts repair their damaged image. Benoit explains that bolstering will only strengthen an organization’s image and “offset damage to its reputation” if it is accepted by the public (2017, p. 180). Since many people in the public are not accepting the bolstering efforts, a large portion of MGM Resorts’ communication is not helping, but possibly even further damaging its already tattered image. While not proven, a possible explanation for the lack of mortification shown by Mandalay Bay Resort could be rooted in legal liability. Benoit recognized this conflict of interest in his theory. Benoit stated, “image Restoration concerns may, admittedly, conflict with a desire to avoid lawsuits, and the firm must decide whether it is more important to restore its image or avoid litigation” (1997, p. 183-4). There is a difference between the court of law and the court of public opinion. While Mandalay Bay Resort may be trying to protect itself in a court of law, it
final_case_what_happens_in_vegas_doesnt_stay_there.docx