When a fake pop-up shop called Mumumelon appeared just five doors away from a Luluemon store in London, eyebrows were raised. It turned out to be a climate-focused activist campaign focused on exposing a perceived gap between Lululemon’s sustainability messaging and its actual environmental impact. And it left the company in somewhat of a dilemma: start legal action and invite scrutiny, or risk trying to engage constructively with a provocative campaign?

In this episode of WJH Shorts, Tamara Littleton and Kate Hartley dissect an emerging crisis for Lululemon and how it should respond. The stunt is intentionally provocative, openly inviting legal action while framing itself as parody. However, the activists are not attempting to compete commercially; instead, they aim to “embarrass” the brand and push it towards meaningful change. Tamara and Kate discuss how this form of activism represents a shift from traditional protest to more strategic, media-savvy tactics designed to force corporate responses.

Similar past cases show public opinion often sides with activists when brands appear heavy-handed, and this presents a significant challenge to Lululemon. The situation presents both a reputational risk and an opportunity, particularly with a new CEO in place. Rather than reacting defensively, the company may need to engage constructively and consider whether the campaign highlights legitimate areas for improvement.

A full transcript of today’s show is available to read here.

Reputational damage rarely stems from a single incident, but from patterns of failure that expose deeper cultural issues. In 2024 a door blew out on an Alaska Airlines flight and, while not fatal, this reignited concerns rooted in 2018 and 2019 crashes involving Boeing aircraft that killed 346 people and were linked to design flaws and failures in safety processes. What emerged was not just a technical problem but a systemic one, where safety concerns were known, raised, and in some cases ignored.

In this episode of ‘What Just Happened?’, hosts Tamara Littleton and Kate Hartley are joined by aviation expert Dirk Singer to discuss the reputational impact of repeated safety issues for Boeing across a number of years. Subsequent investigations into the company revealed misleading communication with regulators, weak oversight, and a culture where commercial pressures appeared to outweigh engineering judgement.

Despite a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement intended to enforce reform, Boeing later breached its terms, pleading guilty in 2024 and paying further fines. Leadership changes followed, alongside commitments to restructure reporting lines and invest heavily in safety and compliance. But did Boeing’s position as one of only two major global aircraft manufacturers mean it was effectively “too big to fail”?

The central lesson is clear: crises of this scale are rooted in culture. Organisations must prioritise safety, empower whistleblowers, and ensure that critical risks are never subordinated to profit.

A full transcript of today’s show is available to read here.

After going into administration on 2nd March, the fallout for BrewDog’s investors, employees and reputation has been rapid and calamitous. The collapse led to the company being acquired by US beverage firm Tilray, saving some jobs but leading to 484 redundancies and the closure of 38 UK bars. Crucially, the “equity punks” – around 200,000 crowdfunding investors – have lost their investments, while co-founders James Watt and Martin Dickey had already exited with significant personal gains after selling shares in 2017.

In this episode of WJH Shorts, Tamara Littleton and Kate Hartley explore the broader impact of an ever-growing gap between BrewDog’s original narrative and its eventual reality. Once positioned as a disruptive, community-driven brand, it later faced allegations of toxic culture, misleading PR tactics and broken promises. Tamara and Kate discuss early warning signs, including staff whistleblowing and a BBC documentary that exposed deeper issues within the business.

The crisis is now unfolding publicly, particularly on LinkedIn, where Watt has been actively responding to criticism and engaging in a visible dispute with Tilray’s CEO. This reflects a broader shift in how corporate crises are now communicated and contested in real time, and the question of the disconnect between words and actions, and who bears the real cost when a brand’s story unravels, need to be addressed.

A full transcript of today’s show is available to read here.