When companies get together to deal with an outcry over their behaviour, they usually have three goals: to get the public off their backs, to head off government action and to ensure that any sacrifices they make are shared by their competitors. All three are difficult to achieve and most corporate collaborators settle for one or two.

My own industry’s attempt at collaboration is a self-regulation body called the Press Complaints Commission. It has done little to reduce public distaste for the profession. A recent survey by Edelman, the public relations company, found that only 22 per cent of people in the UK trusted the media. Nor has the PCC tamed the rougher practitioners of the trade. Competition for scoops drives some to excess, as the mobile phone hacking scandal shows. But the PCC’s existence has, so far, dissuaded successive UK administrations from introducing privacy laws. (Governments’ fear of the press turning on them helps too.)

Organisations such as the Fair Labor Association, set up in 1999 to end sweatshop conditions in factories worldwide, have done better. There are still occasional protests over working conditions, but by pointing to the FLA set-up, which includes unannounced visits by outside monitors, companies can argue they are taking action. Proposed US legislation prohibiting the sale of sweatshop-made goods has not got anywhere. And because competing companies – signatories include Nike, Adidas and Puma – have signed the same code, they have some assurance they will share whatever costs compliance brings.