There's a time and a place for edgy ... but this isn't it
Last week, millions across the world united in collective outrage over the killing of George Floyd at the hands of police officers in Minneapolis. Protests sprung up in all 50 US states and major cities across the world, and as tensions ran high, rioting also broke out at the sites of many of the demonstrations.
It truly felt like we were witnessing a turning point in history, over the weekend it emerged that real change is being enacted as a result of the protests, and the spotlight being shone on injustices that have been deeply ground into society.
So, it was with surprise and no small amount of disgust that I saw an ad doing the rounds on social media, created by Bristol Gin. The slogan read, “when the shooting starts, the looting starts. Voted no.1 gin by rioters for its complex botanical mix and high flammability. #gin #bristol #PartyParrot #burningbridges”, this accompanied by a picture of said gin bottle with a rag stuffed into its neck and a flaming shot of alcohol on the side.
There’s a time and a place for ‘edgy’ communications, but the heat of a global civil rights movement protesting the killing of a black man isn’t it.
The company in question isn’t the first, and certainly won’t be the last to tie their marketing campaign to current events, and they’re not unique in attempting to take an approach to their communications that runs that very thin line between funny and offensive. But making light of a serious protest which has resulted in injury, death and division should run counter to any agency’s marketing playbook.
The company has since issued an apology, acknowledging that it’s messaging was “way out of line” and making a donation to Black Lives Matter, but it has shown itself to be wildly out of touch with its audience and insensitive to the very real struggles that people are facing at the moment.
But it wasn’t just the outright offensive nature of this particular ad that caused offense. Many major brands faced heavy criticism for their hypocritical approach to supporting the movement, including L’Oréal, who in 2017 fired its black transgender advocate for speaking out against racism, but last week posted on its social that “speaking out is worth it” – the company was called out for using the protests for its own PR and not “walking the walk”.
Consumers vote with their feet; do you really want to show them the door?
During times of social and economic turmoil, how brands behave can have a lasting impact on their bottom-line. This was highlighted by a special edition of the Edelman Trust Barometer published at the end of March. This survey indicated that 65% of consumers stated that how brands responded to the coronavirus pandemic would have “a huge impact” on their future likelihood of buying products, with one in three respondents saying that they’d already stopped using a brand that they believed had acted poorly in response.
A further survey conducted last week by Marketing Week indicated that in the UK, 54% of respondents believe that brands shouldn’t speak out about major issues at all, and with the above examples highlighting how easy it is to get it wrong, many would be wise to follow that lead.
When something of global significance happens, there is always a rush to make a statement or share messaging that allows the brand to join the conversation and appear relevant, and I think there’s a perception that not joining in these conversations is detrimental.
As communicators, it is our job to help clients stay on the pulse of their audience, enabling them to connect in meaningful ways while reflecting their broader purpose and values by assessing the pros and cons of entering into debate before leaping in.
If you’d like support with your next PR campaign, click here to contact the team: