That's not what I got from your article. I saw HyperMac responding to the people who said the display was degrading and dehumanizing, not to the ones who "passed it around the twitter-verse, rolling our eyes and having a good laugh." This part especially seemed odd: "What HyperMac failed to realize was that all the community wanted from them was acknowledgment and support." Really? Then why did the community boycott and attack them instead of asking for acknowledgement and support?
Because they got an apathetic, arrogant, selfish, shitty response, that's why. You respond to people like shit, you get shit back. It's not rocket science.
The alternative being... what, sitting down, listening to what they want to say, and then giving them what they want?
Bear in mind that there's nothing more frustrating that someone apparently taking you seriously and listening to you and then flat-out refusing to give you any of what you want from them. It makes you feel like you were tricked by someone who never took you seriously at all.
Fundamentally, this is about a company facing off against an angry group of people who want to force the company to action that pleases them. No CEO is going to enjoy that.
Also, if the demographic in question isn't your customer base you're likely to treat them somewhat less seriously.
Well, I too was part of their customer base, but not anymore. If this is what the company stands for, consider me out. I'd much prefer purchasing products on their merits than some played out douchey marketing scheme.
