I might've misread the article, but wasn't it not the CEO who caused this, it was some marketers who chose the slogan and the branding, who then shipped it off to managers, who approved it without even looking at what they were approving?
You did not misread. I was wrong, and you are correct that the CEO has no confirmed involvement. I "reasoned" backward from "CEO was punished because of the marketing campaign" to "CEO approved the campaign".
Tangentially, I find it hard to believe that
> Shinsegae’s investigation found no evidence the Starbucks campaign was deliberate
(referring even to the marketers, who were placed on probation [1]) considering that a marketer who is capable of making an AI come up with slogans for a specific day of the year is also capable of asking why the AI chose that particular day.
