Kelly Clarkson, a Bird, and What Happens When Hurt Gets a Microphone

I was on the phone with a client who asked what I thought the strategy should be for Kelly Clarkson and the Brooklyn store she’s been arguing with. They were looking for the lesson. What should either side do when a shopping trip becomes a story everyone has an opinion about?

My first question was the same one I ask before recommending any strategy. What is the goal? Kelly and the store have different interests here, and what either of them wanted at the beginning may have changed considerably by now.

If you missed it, Kelly went into Art of Play in Brooklyn and asked about buying a mechanical bird. According to Kelly, the bird was $14,000, and the response made her feel as though the person helping her had decided she couldn’t afford it. She compared the experience to Julia Roberts walking into that boutique in Pretty Woman. You know the scene. Someone takes one look at you and decides where you belong. Somewhere else.

The store tells a different story. Its bird, Molly, was a fixture used in its shows and wasn’t for sale. It later explained that a nearly identical bird was available through the creator and that staff had offered to show Kelly a less expensive alternative. Kelly challenged that explanation, posted a photograph showing a price tag, and said the store was lying. (forbes.com⁠)

I wasn’t standing beside the bird. Neither were most of the people now weighing in. And the security footage that circulated has no sound, which makes it rather limited evidence in an argument about what someone said and how they said it. (businessinsider.com⁠)

But I have an opinion about what happened next.

Kelly posted as she walked out of the store. The experience was still fresh, and to me, she was clearly hurt. She hadn’t given herself much distance between what happened and what she wanted to say about it.

Kelly has spoken about growing up poor. Knowing that, I can imagine how being treated as though she couldn’t afford something might hit a place that success hasn’t entirely protected. Having enough money and feeling that you are enough are two very different things. I don’t know whether that was happening for Kelly, but I wouldn’t dismiss the possibility. (people.com⁠)

Now, Kelly did not call me from outside the store, an unfortunate oversight. Had she called, I would have said, “Not so fast, girlfriend. Tell me what happened before you tell everybody else.”

There is an idea often attributed to Viktor Frankl about leaving space between stimulus and response. The advice belongs here. Give yourself a moment to decide what you want your response to accomplish before you make it public. (viktorfrankl.org⁠)

My read is that Kelly wanted the store to feel a consequence. You made me feel small. Let me show you how that feels. I understand that impulse. But I would have wanted Kelly to have a little time to herself before inviting millions of people into a moment that had hurt her. Once they arrive, you don’t get to decide how long they stay or what they do with it.

The store responded by explaining the bird and describing the backlash. Kelly responded again. Now there were two arguments. One about whether the bird was available to buy. Another about whether she had been treated badly. Explaining the first doesn’t necessarily resolve the second, and neither side seemed willing to let the other have the last word.

Flashback.

A number of years ago, Kelly bought a ring that had belonged to Jane Austen, and what happened afterward made me like her even more.

Kelly bought the ring at auction in 2012. Britain temporarily blocked its export, and Jane Austen’s House raised the money to purchase it from her. She sold it to the museum for what she had paid and had a replica made. The museum confirms the story itself.

(janeaustens.house⁠)

She wanted something beautiful. The museum wanted to preserve it for the public. They found an ending that accommodated both. This is not a bad human.

And forgive me, but Britain getting protective about one ring leaving the country is a little rich given the objects in British museums that arrived courtesy of other countries having very little say in their departure. The British Museum itself acknowledges the looting of Benin City by British troops in 1897. Jane Austen’s House is a different institution, of course. The historical irony still deserves its moment. (britishmuseum.org⁠)

Back to my client’s question.

If Kelly were on that call, I would ask what she wants now. An apology? An acknowledgment that she was treated dismissively? Does she want people to stop shopping there? Or would she rather wake up tomorrow and discover that nobody is talking about her and this fucking bird?

I suspect that last option may be looking increasingly attractive. But she would have to tell me.

Because if Kelly’s goal is to make the story go away, another post defending her position probably won’t help. Every response gives everyone another reason to respond. At some point, you have to decide whether being understood by strangers is worth another three days of explaining yourself to them.

I would suggest trying to resolve it privately. If Kelly wants to say something publicly afterward, she can stand by how the encounter felt and ask people to leave the employees alone. She can close the conversation without declaring that she imagined the whole thing.

Then I would turn to the store. What is your goal? To sell things. To have people walk through the door, discover these unusual objects, fall in love with something, and buy it.

Well. Quite a few people now know where your door is.

I had never considered making a trip to Art of Play. Now I’m curious. I’ve seen the bird. I’ve seen some of the other extraordinary things in there. I suspect I’m hardly alone.

I wouldn’t assume that people watching this unfold are all crossing the store off their shopping lists. Some are probably adding it. That kind of global introduction would be difficult for a small store to buy.

That is the part I think gets missed when people talk about a public relations disaster. They count the angry comments and assume they are looking at the commercial outcome. Meanwhile, someone else is looking at the merchandise and wondering whether the store is open on Sunday.

The owner has reported harassment and threats, and I take that seriously. Nobody should have to absorb threats over a shopping dispute. (pagesix.com⁠) But the store also has an opportunity to decide what all this new attention will lead to.

I would want its next communication to make me comfortable going in. Explain what is available. Make the prices clear. Address the complaint about how Kelly felt she was treated. Give a prospective customer a reason to think asking a question will be welcome, whether they buy anything or not.

And then show me the wonderful things you sell.

I would spend considerably less energy trying to persuade the world that Kelly Clarkson is wrong. Winning that argument is not a requirement for selling a beautiful object to someone who discovered you through it.

Which brings me to Oprah.

In 2005, Oprah Winfrey was turned away from Hermès in Paris. Her side described the encounter in racial terms; the company said the store was closed for an event. It became an enormous story. Eventually, a Hermès executive appeared on her television show to apologize. She accepted the apology and ended her boycott. (transcripts.cnn.com⁠, latimes.com⁠)

Did the controversy hurt Hermès sales? I haven’t seen evidence that establishes that. Even Oprah telling the world what happened doesn’t tell us what customers subsequently did with their wallets.

But her story had something Kelly and Art of Play might consider. An ending. There was a grievance, an apology, and a way to move forward.

That was the lesson I gave my client. Your goal can change after your first response. You may start out wanting someone to pay for hurting you and discover that you would now happily pay to stop hearing about it. A business may start out defending itself and discover that thousands of potential customers are meeting it for the first time.

Before I help anyone decide what to say next, I want to know what they want to happen next. Otherwise, I’m just helping them keep an argument going.

But when I add up the score, I think they both won. Kelly has had millions of people reinforce that she is somebody, that she is worth something, and that she should be able to buy anything she wants that is for sale. The store won, too. I would bet its foot traffic is up at least 100 percent, probably more. I’d love to see the numbers.

Who suffered? You and me. Do we really need to be part of this story?