Suck My Glock
Member
When common sense does not rule the day, fear will.
I think we all would prefer that the stupid people could be swayed from their idiotic behavior by merely talking to them and informing them of their bumbling ill-advised acting as dolts. But when they cannot be reasoned with, and their actions endanger children;...well,...sometimes the time for talking is over.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/combative-consumers-change-the-marketing-strategy-for-target-and-bud-light-97ca0ac2?mod=djemalertNEWS
Combative Consumers Change the Marketing Strategy for Target and Bud Light
In-person confrontations and the conservative focus on trans issues have disrupted the usual story of purpose-driven marketing, in which brands take stands on social issues
Many brands have long shrugged off criticism of their stands on social issues, but Target and Bud Light just proved that even huge corporations can be made to bend.
Target this week stopped selling certain items from its Pride Month collection after a backlash from some customers that included in-store incidents, and Bud Light last month put on leave two marketing executives who oversaw a collaboration with a transgender influencer that drew criticism and real-life confrontations.
Both brands, along with many other large consumer goods companies, have long supported LGBT rights. And their opponents in each case stirred outrage through social media, where previous corporate pressure campaigns have typically produced a lot of noise without significant results.
But critics this time were focused on transgender issues, which have climbed into the top ranks of conservative social agendas. And they combined their social-media messaging with tense in-person encounters.
That proved enough to disrupt the usual patterns of purpose-driven marketing, in which brands position themselves as forces for good. The strategy’s biggest risks before this year were usually complaints by opponents of a given cause or, conversely, accusations of insufficient commitment to that cause.
The growing number of brands that ran ads, sold rainbow products or changed their logos to support LGBT causes every June, for example, spawned the term “rainbow-washing” to describe a superficial act of Pride marketing.
Then consumers this week knocked down Target displays, threatened employees and used social media to share angry videos from inside stores. Bud Light’s delivery drivers, sales representatives and independent distributors last month were confronted by people on the streets, in bars and in stores.
Target Chief Executive Brian Cornell told staff in an email that the company was trying to address worker-safety concerns while continuing to support the LGBT community.
He thanked store and customer-service workers for dealing with backlash from customers and “high volumes of angry, abusive and threatening calls.”
“What you’ve seen in recent days went well beyond discomfort, and it has been gut-wrenching to see what you’ve confronted in our aisles,” Cornell wrote.
Anheuser-Busch CEO Michel Doukeris this month similarly expressed support for LGBT rights and a desire to protect workers. “Our number-one priority during this entire situation was the safety of our people,” he said.
Social media still plays a key role in brand protests.
While some criticized Pride-themed children’s clothing in Target’s collection as a general matter, others objected to a transgender-friendly swimsuit they said was being marketed to children. Though Target sells the swimsuit only in adult sizes, the misconception spread on social media.
Others called out Target items produced by Abprallen, a brand that sells some products elsewhere with satanic references, such as a “Satan Respects Pronouns” enamel pin. Those items weren’t sold by Target.
“Previously you could send a homogeneous message to the country, but there’s so much divisiveness and polarization on so many issues that that’s become almost impossible,” said Allen Adamson, co-founder of brand and marketing consulting firm Metaforce.
Social media feeds mean a piece of a marketing campaign designed to target a niche group can be amplified out of context, he added.
That’s what happened when Bud Light sent a personalized can to transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney as part of a broader promotion around March Madness. Her sponsored Instagram post about the can on April 1 was shared widely, with many people including bar and store owners wrongly believing that it was a TV commercial, or that the can with her picture was available in stores.
Companies should also prepare to face more aggressive consumers, research suggests.
Forty-three percent of surveyed Americans said they raised their voice to a customer service representative to show displeasure about their most serious problems with a business in 2022, up from 35% in 2017, according to this year’s National Customer Rage Survey, a long-running assessment of customer attitudes.
Some 17% of those surveyed said they personally behaved in an uncivil manner with a business or organization, the survey found. Consumers’ characterizations of certain behavior also varied, with 12% of overall respondents describing physical and verbal threats as civil behavior.
I think we all would prefer that the stupid people could be swayed from their idiotic behavior by merely talking to them and informing them of their bumbling ill-advised acting as dolts. But when they cannot be reasoned with, and their actions endanger children;...well,...sometimes the time for talking is over.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/combative-consumers-change-the-marketing-strategy-for-target-and-bud-light-97ca0ac2?mod=djemalertNEWS
Combative Consumers Change the Marketing Strategy for Target and Bud Light
In-person confrontations and the conservative focus on trans issues have disrupted the usual story of purpose-driven marketing, in which brands take stands on social issues
Many brands have long shrugged off criticism of their stands on social issues, but Target and Bud Light just proved that even huge corporations can be made to bend.
Target this week stopped selling certain items from its Pride Month collection after a backlash from some customers that included in-store incidents, and Bud Light last month put on leave two marketing executives who oversaw a collaboration with a transgender influencer that drew criticism and real-life confrontations.
Both brands, along with many other large consumer goods companies, have long supported LGBT rights. And their opponents in each case stirred outrage through social media, where previous corporate pressure campaigns have typically produced a lot of noise without significant results.
But critics this time were focused on transgender issues, which have climbed into the top ranks of conservative social agendas. And they combined their social-media messaging with tense in-person encounters.
That proved enough to disrupt the usual patterns of purpose-driven marketing, in which brands position themselves as forces for good. The strategy’s biggest risks before this year were usually complaints by opponents of a given cause or, conversely, accusations of insufficient commitment to that cause.
The growing number of brands that ran ads, sold rainbow products or changed their logos to support LGBT causes every June, for example, spawned the term “rainbow-washing” to describe a superficial act of Pride marketing.
Then consumers this week knocked down Target displays, threatened employees and used social media to share angry videos from inside stores. Bud Light’s delivery drivers, sales representatives and independent distributors last month were confronted by people on the streets, in bars and in stores.
Target Chief Executive Brian Cornell told staff in an email that the company was trying to address worker-safety concerns while continuing to support the LGBT community.
He thanked store and customer-service workers for dealing with backlash from customers and “high volumes of angry, abusive and threatening calls.”
“What you’ve seen in recent days went well beyond discomfort, and it has been gut-wrenching to see what you’ve confronted in our aisles,” Cornell wrote.
Anheuser-Busch CEO Michel Doukeris this month similarly expressed support for LGBT rights and a desire to protect workers. “Our number-one priority during this entire situation was the safety of our people,” he said.
Social media still plays a key role in brand protests.
While some criticized Pride-themed children’s clothing in Target’s collection as a general matter, others objected to a transgender-friendly swimsuit they said was being marketed to children. Though Target sells the swimsuit only in adult sizes, the misconception spread on social media.
Others called out Target items produced by Abprallen, a brand that sells some products elsewhere with satanic references, such as a “Satan Respects Pronouns” enamel pin. Those items weren’t sold by Target.
“Previously you could send a homogeneous message to the country, but there’s so much divisiveness and polarization on so many issues that that’s become almost impossible,” said Allen Adamson, co-founder of brand and marketing consulting firm Metaforce.
Social media feeds mean a piece of a marketing campaign designed to target a niche group can be amplified out of context, he added.
That’s what happened when Bud Light sent a personalized can to transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney as part of a broader promotion around March Madness. Her sponsored Instagram post about the can on April 1 was shared widely, with many people including bar and store owners wrongly believing that it was a TV commercial, or that the can with her picture was available in stores.
Companies should also prepare to face more aggressive consumers, research suggests.
Forty-three percent of surveyed Americans said they raised their voice to a customer service representative to show displeasure about their most serious problems with a business in 2022, up from 35% in 2017, according to this year’s National Customer Rage Survey, a long-running assessment of customer attitudes.
Some 17% of those surveyed said they personally behaved in an uncivil manner with a business or organization, the survey found. Consumers’ characterizations of certain behavior also varied, with 12% of overall respondents describing physical and verbal threats as civil behavior.
