Ng Jing Yng, TODAY Channel NewsAsia 14 Oct 10;
SINGAPORE : Worried residents, searches by animal interest and wildlife groups, even police officers having to cordon off the area - all because of a purported "bear" sighting along Ulu Pandan Road which has turned out to be a publicity stunt by a company to market shavers.
The blurry video clip of a purported "bear" rummaging through a dustbin at a bus stop had been making the rounds on the Internet. It was also reported on television and in newspapers such as Lianhe Wanbao, Shin Min Daily and The New Paper.
In a statement on Wednesday, through public relations agency Fleishman-Hillard, Philips Electronics Singapore clarified that the bear was a mascot for a guerilla marketing campaign for a shaver undertaken by social media agency, The Secret Little Agency.
"We acknowledge that the resemblance of the mascot to a live bear has caused some public concern in the neighbourhood where the mascot was sighted. We had anticipated the attention that the bear will draw but have no intention to cause any alarm. We would like to apologise for any concern caused," the electronics giant said.
But the police, as well as tens of men and women from Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) and Wildlife Reserves Singapore who scoured the area for hours on Wednesday, were not amused.
On Wednesday night, a police spokesman said: "In response to media queries on the sighting of a 'bear' in Ulu Pandan, Police confirm that we're investigating an offence of Public Nuisance under Section 268 of the Penal Code."
On Monday, the video clip was sent to several news outlets by a person claiming to be a civil engineer named "Wilson Tay", who claimed his teenaged son shot the clip while he was driving on the road.
TODAY newspaper decided against running the story on Wednesday until proper checks could be done, including finding out the full particulars of the so called witness and having this reporter meet him face-to-face to ascertain the authenticity of the "bear sighting" claims he had made online.
This reporter had sent an email to the informant, asking him to call her – which he did. But when this reporter then tried to contact Mr Tay on the mobile number he provided, the person who answered denied he was Mr Tay and said she was not the first one to call that number looking for the informant.
When contacted, The Secret Little Agency said the aim was to get the public to blog and talk about the sighting on social media.
Creative partner Nicholas Ye said they called up to enquire with the Police if a licence was needed on Sunday before heading down to film the video on Monday at about 2am.
"This is irresponsible and it is a waste of resources ... publicity by all means, but this has gone way too far," said Acres founder and executive director Louis Ng, whose group also conducted an hour long search on Tuesday.
Singaporeans whom MediaCorp spoke to had mixed reactions to the news.
"It is hilarious that this bear mascot got on the news ... but imagine the stress and work they have caused the police and zoo over this silly mistaken identity," said a nurse Lee Xiu Hua, 24.
The latest publicity gimmick brings to mind SingPost’s postbox graffiti stunt in January this year - the last time resources were invested when SingPost employed an agency to spray graffiti on its postboxes in the lead-up to the Youth Olympic Games.
Members of the public were startled when they spotted a vandal at work, and called the police. The police said then that they would take up the matter with SingPost.
Wild bear chase
Electronics firm says sorry for ad campaign that alarmed public
Victoria Vaughan Straits Times 14 Oct 10;
TWELVE employees of the Singapore Zoo rushed to the scene, one armed with a tranquilliser gun. Four police officers showed up for whatever help might be needed. Three members of a nature group spent hours searching a forest.
And some residents of Ulu Pandan were left wondering and worrying if indeed danger lurked on their doorstep.
Time and energy were wasted yesterday, all in the name of a new media marketing campaign for a shaver. Industry players said the stunt tested the boundaries of responsible behaviour.
Last night, Philips Electronics Singapore apologised for alarming the public with its guerilla advertising campaign featuring a video of a 'bear' along Ulu Pandan Road.
The police told The Straits Times that it is now investigating if what happened was an offence of public nuisance under Section 268 of the Penal Code, which can lead to a fine of up to $1,000.
In a statement, Philips said the 'bear' was actually a mascot deployed as part of a guerilla marketing campaign undertaken by social media agency, The Secret Little Agency, to launch a new shaver.
'We had anticipated the attention that the bear would draw but had no intention to cause any alarm. We would like to apologise for any concern caused,' it said.
It is understood that the agency had not alerted any of the authorities about the 'bear' before the campaign, though it did inquire if a permit was needed to wear an 'animal mascot outfit'.
Mr Nicholas Ye, creative partner at The Secret Little Agency, said that an employee had filmed someone in a custom-made bear suit in Ulu Pandan Road at 2am on Monday.
The video was uploaded onto citizen journalism website Stomp with a write-up. In it, a man said he was driving along the road with his son when they spotted the animal near a dustbin. The video was reported by various media on Tuesday and yesterday.
Alarmed by the news, three members of Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) set off for the forest behind the bus stop at 11pm on Tuesday to search for the animal, and later again between 1am and 3am. Mr Louis Ng, executive director of Acres, said they had to check it out even though they were sceptical that there was a bear on the loose.
He was left fuming when he found out it was nothing but a ploy.
'You shouldn't joke about such things... Residents were concerned, the police called us to ask if we were doing something about it. You can't tell people there is an adult bear in their neighbourhood. It's completely irresponsible.'
The zoo also swung into action with 12 of its curators heading there. It is understood that the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority had contacted them. Led by veterinarian Serena Oh, they combed the area for 11/2 hours but found nothing.
Speaking during the search, Dr Oh said they were looking for paw prints or signs of disturbance consistent with a large animal. 'If we had spotted it we would have fired the tranquilliser gun,' she said.
She added that the bear looked like it could be an Asiatic black bear, but the video was unclear. The zoo does not keep such a bear but has five sun bears, four sloth bears and two polar bears.
Some residents and workers in the area who heard the news were alarmed.
Mr Elvin Aristorenas, centre manager at Total English Learning in Pandan Valley condominium, said he was worried. 'The bear was obviously hungry as it was digging for food,' he said.
The campaign was roundly criticised by some industry players. They noted this was the second time in recent months that a guerilla marketing campaign had backfired. SingPost recently caused a furore when it had graffiti on its post boxes that turned out to be a campaign for a post box art competition.
On the 'bear' stunt, Mr Baey Yam Keng, deputy managing director of public relation agency Hill and Knowlton, had this to say: 'There needs to be a line drawn... in cases where it may draw unnecessary alarm and waste public resources... Creativity is important but it must be balanced with some common sense.'
Additional reporting by Ng Kai Ling and Cheryl Ong
