The true story of how a few women used Twitter to eliminate a really terrible Hallmark greeting card in a matter of hours.
by Imran Siddiquee
In a display of the lighting-quick power of organized social media, Hallmark UK has apologized and pledged to remove a grossly offensive card (see above) just a few hours after it was posted online by a concerned consumer.
The card, which is aimed at 13-year-old girls, promises that your boyfriend will “buy you diamonds and rubies… when you’ve got bigger boobies.” User @Cheesyhel first posted the picture around 4:56 am PT this morning, after finding it for sale in a store near her:
It was soon re-tweeted, blogged about and posted across the Internet. By this afternoon the mainstream press had even picked up the image and the story building on Twitter.
People used the #NotBuyingIt hashtag to directly question @HallmarkUK about selling such a blatantly terrible card for 13-year-olds:
All of which led rather remarkably to an apology from Hallmark (the card was manufactured by a company owned by Hallmark, but was something they created prior to being purchased by the greeting card giants) and a pledge to track down all existing copies of the card still in circulation:
Kudos to Hallmark for their quick response, but the fact that passionate consumers were able to call-out, organize around and ostensibly eliminate a seriously problematic piece of media from the world’s most recognizable greeting card company (within the span of a single day!) is an awesome reminder of just what we are capable of as a community. And, in particular, the fact that this campaign was sparked, led and won by women is proof that new media is empowering the marginalized in a way that old media never did.
Keep being amazing, Internet.
UPDATE
Hallmark posted this official statement just now:
“This card was produced by Creative Publishing prior to Hallmark Cards acquiring the company in 1998. We are as surprised and horrified as anyone else to have discovered that there are still copies in circulation. The card has not been produced for over 15 years and would never pass our own strict guidelines of taste and appropriateness. We would like to assure all our customers that we will do everything in our power to track down remaining copies.”
Imran is the Communications Director at MissRepresentation.org. Follow him on Twitter @imransiddiquee
[...] [...]
Love to witness the power of social media to work together for good! Proud to have banded together with so many others to protest this impossibly awful card!
[...] sexist Hallmark card was posted on Twitter in the UK. It was re-posted and criticized so much that Hallmark has taken [...]
Yes, it is an awful card and should have never been created. It’s a shame that it was not only published, but also available for sale at Hallmark stores! On a less important note, it also has poor grammar, too.
However, let’s not stop with just calling out this card. Let’s make sure that women are well represented everywhere! The media is often bad at portraying women in a positive way, so let’s keep promoting good examples!
Hi Alex (and to everyone else who has taken the time to comment).
Imran’s excellent post does show how social media can help raise awareness about all sorts of things. In this case, the card was actually produced by a company called Arnold Barton before it became part of our subsidiary group, Hambledon Studios. We are as surprised and horrified as anyone else to have discovered that there are still copies in circulation. These cards are NOT sold in any Hallmark store. The card has not been produced for over 15 years and would never pass our own strict guidelines of taste and appropriateness.
We can only apologise for any offence caused and would like to assure you that we will do everything in our power to track down remaining copies.
The Hallmark UK & Ireland team
Thanks for your reply. It is good to know that you’re not treating it as “ha ha, just a joke…”
Since you started it:
Where is the grammatical error in this card? Certainly you are not referring to the “you’ve bigger boobies” part, which was misquoted with a completely redundant “got” thrown in there.
I, honestly, can’t locate it.
I agree with all the “rah rah for women” stuff though.
It’s so terrific how social media could influence such a large firm AND elicit a response so quickly!
found this on tumblr:
“That you can buy this card
should kill all skepticism
from the people who still wonder
why we need feminism.”
Although social media was used to contact Hallmark and spread this. I have no doubt it would have been taken care of just as quickly if it had been brought to the attention of Hallmark by contacting them directly.
Thanks to all who helped highlight this – as I wrote on Jump! Mag, our intention was not to name and shame Hallmark (we had no idea that it was made by a subsidiary) but to open a dialogue about how we view girls, and the casual sexism that even young girls are exposed to.
George – as I said, we had no idea who the manufacturer of the card was, and we had no intention of turning it into a Social Media Twitterstorm. Someone on Twitter discovered that the company had been purchased by Hallmark and started tweeting to them, and about them. By this point, there was no controlling the story, despite our best efforts to calm people down.
Thankfully, Hallmark responded promptly and with a great response and so we would like to ask those who were so appalled by this to continue talking about the sexualisation of children, and the pressures that girls are exposed to.
I thought it was cute, but I saw the total lack of seriousness and humor in it that you people didn’t
Nice job, everyone–this card is horrifying!
You’re right: 31 hours a week IS a problem… But, media is like a drug. TV and the internet are addictive and sadly, a lot of kids are allowed to be “babysat” by the TV or internet. We just have to deal with it as a society. We must become aware that the most vulnerable of our citizens are being CONSTANTLY bombarded with media images, at home, at school, at friends’ houses, etc. and we should be aware of what we are teaching them.
Not to burst any bubbles, but if it hadn’t been produced for ages, might the cry-out not be counter-productive? I’d be surprised if the last few cards in circulation didn’t become “collectors’ items” with some people.
Another interesting point, of course, is that everyone goes on about declining standards, but this card is not new, but 15 years old. Apparently, standards were pretty low back then.