Brand Empathy is not "Covid-washing"

Confirmation bias in some academic research can be a genuine problem. Having studied many papers covering FMCG issues over the years it is unfortunate that some researchers clearly set out to prove a hypothesis and interpret all information to match the conspiracy.

That’s the only interpretation I can put on a study led by Auckland University researchers aimed at investigating “the timing, nature and extent of COVID-washing on public social media accounts by New Zealand's major food and drink brands in the initial stage of the pandemic after the first case was detected in New Zealand and when stay-at-home lockdown restrictions … were in place”.

At least that’s how the paper describes it. When it was published in Frontiers in Nutrition journal someone had snuck “Marketing by Unhealthy Food and Drinks Brands” into the headline.

“Covid-Washing”, not a proper academic term, was deemed to have existed, and by golly the academics were going discover some come hell or high water. 

The study covered five big brands in the confectionery, snacks, non-alcoholic beverages, and quick-service restaurants categories, across Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube from February to May last year.

Academics trawled through posts to find examples. 14 of 20 food and drink brands referenced COVID-19 in their posts (the other 6 didn’t post anything), and 27% of the 1,368 posts were “COVID-19 themed”, dominated by fast-food companies.

The Food & Grocery Council doesn’t represent fast-food companies, so I’ll stick with examples of what the researchers said about some of our members.

For the record major FGC members from Unilever, Coca-Cola to Ferrero and others went “dark” with media campaigns during COVID and pulled all their planned campaigns. This made sense. When the whole country was at home anxious about a pandemic it would be inappropriate to have upbeat advertising showing happy people in non-social distancing groups doing normal things. In some cases, FMCG companies went further and donated airtime and booked slots to the Ministry for COVID messages. Others donated products to charities or made cash donations to assist social agencies.

While some academics called this sort of thing “COVID-washing”, most New Zealanders would view this sort of activity as charitable giving and reasonable responses from business people wanting to help their local communities.

The examples picked out by the paper's authors indicate to me that their perceptions are pretty out of step with society. I took the time to dig out all the FGC member social media posts referred too. When there is a detailed review of the actual communication they’d tagged with the emotive and insulting term of “COVID-washing” the images and messages are reviewed are low-key and well-intentioned.

Among the themes were “We know these are challenging times for all of us …” (Lindt), while one applauded front-line workers with “The world is forever grateful to you for not having a break right now. #ThankYou” (KitKat, Nestle)".

One Facebook post that I recall seeing at the time was quite beautiful. It was from Whittaker’s which had two white chocolate bars in the shape of a cross wishing heath workers well.

All posts I’ve saw from members were sensitive and dignified posts communicating in a professional and appropriate manner. To have said nothing and to ignore what was going on in the world would have been bizarre.

Other equally light-hearted single Facebook posts to parents' accounts were for at home activities.  Examples included recipes for home-made versions of their products (Arnott's). Lewis Road published a colouring-in sheet of a cow and New Zealand landscape. These posts were directed at parents and from reports were most appreciated.

None of the posts from members listed in the paper are anything other than respectful and reasonable communication during a difficult time.

As if to give their breathless findings more weight, the researchers gave the term ‘Covid-washing’ a formal definition: “the misappropriation of social concern about the pandemic in order to promote unhealthy products and build brand loyalty”.

This has clearly been an attempt to create the impression of something that did not exist – FGC food companies apparently misappropriating pandemic concerns to capture Kiwis in weak and vulnerable moments. That’s not what people within our membership were thinking and the suggestion is insulting to those who worked extremely hard during COVID to make sure shelves were refilled.

The fact is people in our food and beverage companies have always gone out of their way to give back to their communities, and that’s what happened here. The amount donated to food banks and cash donations made to frontline social services was phenomenal.

A few posts on Facebook reflecting what’s going on in the community and in particular saying thanks to nurses and other health workers is not campaigning. It’s being in tune with real life. People in companies through their brands which have connections with New Zealanders have the right to communicate with fellow citizens and in doing so express their sympathy, empathy, and share their concerns, and that’s what our members did.

Some of our bigger companies as I mentioned earlier did exactly the opposite of what they’re being accused of, and pulled all advertising and, in some cases, donated that spend to buy medical equipment to vulnerable communities.

In the end, I believe most Kiwis saw such messages in a positive light and accept the sentiment as being genuine.

Let’s not forget these companies and their employees faced genuine fear themselves as they went into stores to make sure the shelves were full for the rest of us.

In the main, these posts weren’t just about communicating with consumers but also showing their own people they were showing empathy with what was happening in the wider community.

It’s a pity some work hard to interpret such activities in a darker light.