The Daily Mail poses a question about a common issue: Babies who cry and cry in confined public areas. And it invites reader feedback.
Meanwhile, legal types might be wondering if crying babies will be classified as a "public nuisance," at least in some settings.
Here's the story. Fashion blogger Arielle Charnas couldn't stop her baby from crying in the first class cabin on the Delta flight from New York to Los Angeles. She had purchased first class tickets because she assumed the extra "spread" room would prevent persistent crying. Or be able to shush it quickly.
The assumption was wrong. And a Delta flight attendant mandated Charnas and the baby exit first class and go the back of the plane.
The mother was steamed. After all, she had paid for first class accommodations.
She brought her beef to Instagram. So far, there are been about 1600 comments. Many of those supportive of her.
Before this development, we have encountered the crying-baby matter frequently in restaurants. The controversy had been if the guest with the baby should be made to leave? Or maybe children under a certain age not allowed into the dining area?
Of course, babies are a reality of life. Often they are so agitated that nothing can be done to stop the crying. However, also reality is that the noise is annoying. I was indeed annoyed when a four-month-old wouldn't let up in a public laundry facility in 110-degree heat in Tucson, Arizona. After I transmitted two very dirty looks, the father took the baby outside.
In that part of AZ, barking dogs can be classified as a public nuisance. Why not crying babies in public facilities?
Simplification, Tone of Authority, Wit. Those are the NOW communications work-horses. Contact Jane Genova for complimentary consultation for your advocacy/marketing communications (firstname.lastname@example.org).