A post popped up in our Google Reader earlier this week, from beauty and fashion blog Blair On A Budget. It seems that Blair, like Hidden Eloise with Paperchase before her, had an issue with a brand and decided to write about it, kick-starting a mini wave of viral promotion on Twitter.

This month’s More! magazine is an ‘inside men’s minds special’ with features that promise to tap into the hidden thoughts of men and lay them bare for women to learn from. In the blog post, Blair expressed her dislike at the tone of the editorial, finding particular distaste at the effect on young girls’ self-esteem, and the tendency to group men into ‘identikit characters’.

As she puts it; “my irritation at the idiotic magazine features was simmering all afternoon, and that, combined with the fact that I hadn’t had a very good day at work, prompted me to update Twitter somewhat angrily when I got home.”

This is a standard story so far. It’s how many people all around the world use the site – to vent or express either very positive or very negative opinion. However, in Blair’s case, More! responded – but not in the way you might imagine. The magazine re-tweeted her comments to their 11,449 followers, and as two of the comments had been originally posted as replies to someone she was following (meaning they wouldn’t have been visible to anyone else unless they went looking), exposed what Blair had considered to be private thoughts.

The re-tweets were followed by a rather patronising tweet from the magazine itself; “We don’t think @sequentially is a fan of More! magazine. She got very heated about it, didn’t she?” which resulted in some mild, but still upsetting responses to Blair from More!’s followers.

In a wonderfully ironic twist, though More!’s re-posting of Blair’s comments seem to have been intended to discredit her opinion, the opposite occurred. Whereas a few took umbrage to Blair’s ideals and tweeted at her accordingly, many more agreed and voiced their support.

She goes on to say that while she’d prefer her personal comments not to have been reposted, she can’t help but think it’s good; “It’s a strange sort of equality, in which readers and consumers are gaining power. I also can’t help but think if even a handful of people saw my comments and thought I had a point, this particular stunt has backfired on More! magazine.”

The moral of this tale is one we’ve seen many times before – from Habitat, Paperchase and even Nestlé. A brand responsinding inappropriately to a consumer might make the individual in question seem like a victim, but in fact, sometimes it’s quite the opposite. Brands beware, as we see in Blair’s case above, dealing with a detractor in a sarcastic fashion doesn’t always go the way you want it to.