“Go wake up, go bankrupt,” warns Mrs. Teresi before opening fire on the cans. Teresi took a cue from country singer Kid Rock, who weeks earlier produced a video of him shooting Bud Light cans with a submachine gun. The protests are part of a conservative boycott of the brand’s apparent support for transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, who displayed a personalized can of the beer on a post company-sponsored social media platform.
Bud Light, manufactured by Anheuser-Busch, is now one of the latest American companies caught up in the culture wars in the land of Uncle Sam, joining a long list that includes Disney, the National Football League, Nike, Target and the chain of fast food Chick-fil-A.
“Clearly, consumers are fed up with American companies trying to impose values on the people they are supposedly serving. People now act very quickly when they see companies ‘awake’ in harmful ways,” says Will Hind, chief executive of Consumer’s Research, a firm that has led campaigns targeting American Airlines and Levi’s.
Boycotts can be found on both sides of the political spectrum. Brands including sportswear company Under Armor and food company Goya have faced backlash after their respective CEOs came out in support of former President Donald Trump. Whether these campaigns are effective or not is up for debate.
In the case of Bud Light, it was knocked out of its position as the top-selling beer in the US, with sales in the month to June 3 falling nearly 25%. An analysis released by JP Morgan in May projected Anheuser-Busch’s earnings for the year to fall 26%, with sales not fully recovering until 2024.
Originally a slang term denoting awareness of social injustice and inequality, the word “woke” is used by right-wing Republicans as a pejorative umbrella covering a range of topics from climate change to supporting minorities.
Evan Nierman, public relations crisis manager and author of ‘The Cancel Culture Curse’, tells the BBC that similar boycotts have had devastating financial impacts on American businesses.
“The immediate financial impacts of the boycotts are evident. They can produce even greater losses when you factor in the long-term damage to your reputation and the loss of loyal customers,” he says.
Social and political posture of a brand
A survey released in April by Method Communications, a public relations and marketing agency, shows that 67% of Americans say that their purchases are affected by the posture of a brand, while 42% say that they stopped buying from a certain brand because of its positioning. about a problem. More than a third of respondents say they pay attention to a company’s views on social issues.
Some brands, experts say, face temporary losses just to emerge in a better position, championed by their supporters. Among them is Nike, which in 2018 saw detractors burning sneakers and destroying other products in response to the company’s support of the United States’ racial justice protests. quarterback (football field position) Colin Kaepernick.
More recently, the brand also angered some Americans with a campaign to promote leggings and sports bras wearing Dylan Mulvaney, the same transgender activist at the center of the Bud Light controversy.
“There has been all kinds of controversy about Nike because of their stance. But, she stood her ground, and you know what? Sales have increased! They made a commitment, and while that might disqualify them for some clients and some markets, it opened up a position for them in others,” says Tony D’Angelo, professor of public affairs at Syracuse University.
While sales initially declined in 2018, they quickly recovered. In 12 months, stock prices rose by more than 60%. The company ended its most recent fiscal year with gross profit of US$ 22 billion (about R$ 105 billion), an increase of almost 3% compared to the previous year.
According to experts, the key factor that can determine how well a brand resists a boycott is how they respond to the initial disagreement. Bud Light, for example, has come under intense criticism for its response to the Dylan Mulvaney controversy. After remaining silent on the matter for several days, CEO Brendan Whitworth said in a statement that the company “never intended to be part of an argument that divides people”.
The response was widely seen as a blunder by experts in brand strategy and crisis communications. D’Angelo characterized the brand’s response as ‘hesitant’.
“You have to make a commitment. If you hesitate, people will rightly question what they really stand for. This is exactly the position you don’t want to be in,” she explains.
D’Angelo’s comments were echoed by Jordan McCauley, a member of the Atlanta LGBTQIA+ community and founder of CelebrityPR, a company that works with brands.
“Brands need to pick a position and stick to it. What hurt Bud Light was that they seemed to change positions. If they really supported Dylan Mulvaney, they would have defended her, and everyone who protested. But they backed off. Both sides see this as inauthenticity,” he says.
When asked by the BBC for comment on the boycott and its response, an Anheuser-Busch spokesperson said only that “for the year,” Bud Light remains the top beer brand in the US by volume and dollar sales.
Observers believe boycotts of brands or companies are likely to increase in the coming years, in part as a result of the debate over the “awakening” ideology that plays a key role in the upcoming 2024 US election.
* With information from the BBC
Stay tuned to Adnews on Instagram and LinkedIn! For us, leaving the obvious is as obvious as creating and transforming.
The post Brands are boycotted for expressing opinion in the US appeared first on ADNEWS.
