Bad Company Awards 2008

Last updated: 18 September 2009

Now in its second year, the Bad Company Awards highlight irresponsible behaviour by the world’s leading brands, drawing attention to notable abuses of consumer rights over the previous 12 months.

The five winners in 2008 were:

Tesco – Sledgehammer Award for silencing criticism
For its US$34 million lawsuit against three Thai journalists critical of the British retailer’s expansion plans. Two of the cases are in final mediation, whilst the third criminal charge could still result in a lengthy jail sentence.

Kellogg’s and Lego – Blindingly obvious danger Award for making Lego brick candy
For thinking candy in the shape of plastic toy bricks would be a good idea.

Eli Lilly – The Marketing Overdose Award for rampant promotion
For repeatedly breaching marketing regulations with its blockbuster drug for erectile dysfunction.

Samsung – Nice little sideline Award for selling tanks, not just TVs
For the little-publicised fact that this consumer electronics company also builds artillery systems.

Toyota – Green-scrubbing Award for environmental impact
They may make the Prius, but Toyota picks up an award for audacious greenwashing and some rather contradictory marketing exercises.

Latest news... Shortly after receiving the Blindingly Obvious Danger Award, Lego released a statement to assure consumers that the product is “scheduled to be discontinued at the end of this calendar year”. We congratulate Lego on doing the right thing, and look forward to not seeing Lego brick candy in the shops in 2009. Find out more.

What do you think of the winners? Who would have you chosen?

Get further comment and share your own thoughts on the awards on the CI blog.

Downloads

Bad Company Awards 2008 factsheet

The 2007 Awards factsheet

Awards Methodology The Bad Company Awards 2008 are nominated by CI member organisations, CI staff and invited third party organisations. A judging panel, made up of the CI Secretariat and experts from CI member organisations, selects the winners against broad criteria intended to draw attention to the abuse of consumer rights around the world. Selection is based on the relative merits of entries and is not intended to be scientific or exhaustive.