Chick-fil-A | Facebook | News

Chick-fil-a Busted Using Fake Facebook Persona to Do Damage Control?

Busted

Chick-fil-a may have been busted doing damage control for the lie they made up regarding the recall of kids toys from the Jim Henson Company. A redhead named Abby Farle is seen defending the company to critical commenters. Only problem is, her profile picture is a stock image and she just joined Facebook four hours prior to leaving the defensive comments.

Writes Gizmodo of the discovery: "It's a dirty, awful trick that is completely embarrassing and just shows how sleazy a company backed up against a wall can be. Especially a company that doesn't believe in treating all humans equally. Of course, there's a chance that this could all be a stunt to shame Chick-fil-A but that company hardly needs more shaming. Chick-fil-A is being rightfully pummeled to the ground by anyone who believes in equality, its delicious chicken sandwiches be damned."

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!

    Posted by: Edd | Jul 25, 2012 12:28:46 PM


  2. So "bearing false witness" is cool with Jesus? Good to know...

    Posted by: Elsewhere | Jul 25, 2012 12:30:27 PM


  3. Am I missing something? That stock photo does not match the profile picture, and there's no evidence cited in that post that Chik-fil-a was behind this.

    Posted by: Matt | Jul 25, 2012 12:31:05 PM


  4. Hahahahaha. I bet Ms. Royalty Free Pretty Redhead supports drilling in fragile ecosystems and deregulating banks, too.

    Posted by: Mike | Jul 25, 2012 12:31:10 PM


  5. pretty fishy, but i don't see any proof that chick-fil-a is behind this..

    Posted by: Shawn | Jul 25, 2012 12:33:01 PM


  6. @MATT: That is correct. This only indicates (not even proves) that someone MAY have joined FB for this person, and we have no idea who that person is.

    But you'll find on this blog that the articles tend to not stick to the facts. Purported "news" stories are often editorialized or fused with surmises to further a POV. It'll stop bothering you eventually when you automatically fact check everything written here.

    Posted by: Jack | Jul 25, 2012 12:33:41 PM


  7. 1 Timothy 4:2, "Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron..."

    Posted by: Joseph | Jul 25, 2012 12:34:20 PM


  8. I think it's interesting that Towleroad writes about fake posters on other sites, but completely ignores the swarm of NOM posters on this site that would make a real story.

    Posted by: Brian | Jul 25, 2012 12:43:17 PM


  9. @Matt and Jack

    That thumbnail photo in the pic means nothing. It merely means that the photo you saw with the link at the bottom is one of many photos on that website. Facebook randomly finds a picture, normally, to include in the link.

    A cursory search of that site turned up this pic:
    http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?searchterm=pretty+redhead+teenager+isolated+on+white+smiling&search_group=&lang=en&search_source=search_form#id=3117967

    Almost (if not entirely) the same as the one "Abby Farle" used. Kind of blew your accusations out of the water, did it not?

    Posted by: Colin | Jul 25, 2012 12:43:21 PM


  10. @Matt and Jack

    Facebook doesn't always preview in the comment feed the same photo as the actual URL would display. If you would type in the full URL (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-3117967/stock-photo-pretty-redhead-teenager-isolated-on-white-smiling.html) and see where that page points - the photo is identical to the profile picture of "Abby".

    Posted by: Derek | Jul 25, 2012 12:43:51 PM


  11. MattJack: You obviously have never used stock photography.

    The picture used in the profile is part of a collection taken of the same redhead.

    The photo itself is at Shutterstock here: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=3117967

    Posted by: endo | Jul 25, 2012 12:45:24 PM


  12. I think its great that ChikFilA finds this site dangerous enough to them that they send their shills to post here too. Bobakiah 3:21 Thou arte full of it.

    Posted by: Jeff | Jul 25, 2012 12:47:18 PM


  13. @Colin, Derek, ENDO:

    And this somehow proves that it was Chik Fil A who created this how exactly?

    Posted by: Jack | Jul 25, 2012 12:47:28 PM


  14. Why would anybody except a Chik-Fil-A employee even bother to concoct a fake profile? Even its most ardent supporters could care less whether Muppet toys were banned at one time or another.

    Posted by: jht | Jul 25, 2012 12:49:13 PM


  15. @JHT:

    Plenty of ardent supporters would care about people calling out CFA as being deceitful and mal-intentioned. People do stupid, nonsensical things, PARTICULARLY on the internet.

    So even if you are completely correct that nobody has any reason to do it (which I don't agree with), it's still pure speculation. You can suspect it, sure. But to announce it in a headline as being verified fact? Sorry, that doesn't work for me.

    And it's not the first time. I've said the same thing about editorializing the facts and leaping to unwarranted conclusions many times before on this site. It's fine if it's an opinion site, but I take any factual assertions here with a few grains of salt.

    Posted by: Jack | Jul 25, 2012 12:54:17 PM


  16. @Jack,

    We're not saying that Chik Fil A did it, but who else would have done it, to be honest? Even to the most ardent of supporters, it is just that: a fast food restaurant. Also, why would a genuine person use a stock photo as their FB's profile pic? Stock photos are often used by scam artists and spamsters on FB, and they would hardly frequent other pages, and talk about stuff not related to their "products", would they?

    The evidence is overwhelmingly against Chik Fil A...

    Posted by: Colin | Jul 25, 2012 12:55:35 PM


  17. @Jack

    Okay, we all would love to know who you think actually created this?

    Posted by: Watcher | Jul 25, 2012 12:55:55 PM


  18. They're "Christians" therefore they're LIARS!

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 25, 2012 12:57:48 PM


  19. Who cares if Chick-fil-a actually did it?

    Whoever did it got busted. And that's hilarious!

    Posted by: endo | Jul 25, 2012 12:58:31 PM


  20. @Jack,

    I was just pointing out that the photo in the profile image was the photo that was on the actual shutterstock URL giving credence to the idea that the profile was fake. I do think it's suspicious and the logical culprit is Chick-fil-A PR, but I didn't say that there was no doubt that Chick-fil-A did it themselves.

    Posted by: Derek | Jul 25, 2012 12:59:04 PM


  21. The headline of this article is a question, not a statement of fact Jack. Go read fox news if you want to talk about editorializing the news.

    Posted by: NautiBoyz | Jul 25, 2012 12:59:32 PM


  22. I'm Canadian, so I've never had a Chick Fil-A sandwich. A lot of y'all are bemoaning that you can't eat their sandwiches anymore. Why not just go to KFC instead and get a Big Crunch? If the pickle (yuck) is vital to the flavour, order it without lettuce and with a pickle. Voila, no need to eat at Chick Fil-A! I'd ban them, too, but we don't have their stupid restaurants here! Yah! Suck it, bigots... Muppets rule! Miss Piggy is giving you a big karate chop to your image and hopefully wallets.

    Posted by: Graphicjack | Jul 25, 2012 12:59:53 PM


  23. @jack: this might help with your comprehension of the "statement" in the article's title:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%3F

    Posted by: Dego | Jul 25, 2012 12:59:54 PM


  24. right-wing Christians LOVE to break the ninth commandment :)

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jul 25, 2012 1:09:39 PM


  25. If Chik-Fil-A keeps digging their hole deeper, at this rate they'll catch up with Romney and his tax returns.

    Posted by: FuryOfFirestorm | Jul 25, 2012 1:10:08 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Happy One Year Anniversary to Marriage in New York« «