Having just read the original blog, I have to say I think any company that re-tweets negative comments (and boy were her comments negative – ’40 chav gimps’? ‘it made me want to kill everyone involved’?) is facing up to the reality of thought towards its brand, head-on.
Good for them, I say.

However, the tweet that mentioned @moremagazine was referencing them rather than speaking to them. What is notable is that More! clearly then went to her Twitter account to see and retweet the criticisms which did not mention @moremagazine directly.

So I understand why whoever tweets for more! would assume Blair expected and wanted them to see it.

I can also say that when someone tweets something negative about your product and tags their tweet so you’re in it, it can feel like you’re being insulted and so it’s not an unusual reaction to ask your followers if they support you.

I’m not saying that I’d have done the same, but I understand why they did what they did.

And that is indeed the trouble with Twitter: everyone’s rules are different

Also, to the person above and others who have said the same, I honestly didn’t intend the tweets as feedback; I included @moremagazine so my followers would know what I was talking about, since there’s also an American magazine with that name, @moremag I believe. I’m not a Twitter newbie but I tend to only interact with people I know on there, and it never occurred to me that a national publication would pick up on individual comments in this manner, as I assumed the tag would be used too extensively for that to be possible. Also, the one tweet they didn’t RT was the one with their name in it!