I think this is a case where it's justified to consider them guilty until proven innocent. Interacting with customers is what they paid these guys to do. It's not like he's doing this in his spare time or anything. Yeah, they probably don't endorse it, but as has been pointed out elsethread, this isn't the first time this awful marketing company pissed people off. When it comes to Googling for due diligence, surely the same applies to choosing your marketing company.
Choosing what to examine in the course of due diligence is often a function of experience. Should someone be lambasted for making a mistake their first time?
Well yes, otherwise what incentive do they have to get it right the first time?
If and when the manufacturer dumps these guys and issues a public apology for their behavior, we certainly should forgive them. But it's still justifiable to place part of the responsibility on them for what happened.
The moment you pay them, you're endorsing it. Sure, make your public "whoops" statements, but at the end of the day, it's your fault for hiring them and you get the rep hit as well.
