Bud Light's parent company loses $6B in 6 days after "woke campaign" backlash

Like a broken record - big-name brands team up with public figures to promote their products, only to face backlash from certain groups.

Nike has drawn criticism for its partnership with social-justice advocate Colin Kaepernick, M&M's faced pushback for its use of female "spokescandies" in its marketing, and recently, Bud Light and its parent company, Anheuser Busch, have come under fire from singer Kid Rock and others after enlisting the help of transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in a "woke" marketing campaign.

In simple terms - Some conservatives on social media use the phrase "get woke go broke" to say that brands that support inclusive campaigns make a lot of people angry and lose money. But actually, experts say that inclusive campaigns can be great for businesses because they help them connect with important groups of people and make more money.

Alissa Heinerscheid, the VP of marketing at Bud Light, emphasized the importance of reaching out to a new audience in a recent interview on the Make Yourself at Home podcast, especially for Bud Light.

"If we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future for Bud Light,”

She said in a interview posted to YouTube in March, before the current wave of anti-trans backlash.

According to reports, Anheuser-Busch lost billions after collaborating with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, leading some to label the push for diversity, equity, and inclusion as "corrosive". In recent weeks, the beer giant's market value has decreased by $5 billion. Budweiser Brewing Company APAC 's Vice President of Marketing, Alissa Heinerscheid, stated that the brand's aim was to "evolve and elevate".

We can argue that modern brands are striving for inclusivity and relevance, especially among young people, allthough brands do not aim to be polarizing, but the world we live in is highly fragmented and polarized. Therefore, there is always a chance of receiving criticism for any move made. However, the backlash is often temporary, and the long-term benefits are more significant.

耐克 serves as a prime example. In 2018, the brand featured Colin Kaepernick in an ad, which sparked a boycott campaign against the athletic brand. Kaepernick became a polarizing figure after kneeling during the national anthem to raise awareness about police brutality. However, Nike went on to win an Emmy for its Kaepernick commercial the following year. Despite the backlash, the company's stock has increased by approximately 51% since September 2018, when Kaepernick was chosen for the campaign.

Similarly, at the end of last year, 玛氏食品 put its spokescandies for M&M's on "pause" after receiving criticism from right-wing pundits. Among other things, the brand was criticized for displaying all-female candies on certain special packages. However, the brand leaned into the controversy and featured it as part of a pre-planned Super Bowl ad starring Maya Rudolph.

Should political radicalism should be mixed with advertising?

The representation of diversity in political and economic systems is crucial, but are brands truly representing it effectively? For instance, if a brand talks about women's empowerment and the feminist movement while selling products only to women, does that really represent diversity? What about men who identify as feminists? Shouldn't brands delve deeper into the intersectionality of feminism? Posting a statement or a hashtag may not be sufficient. There is no clear right or wrong answer here; perhaps it is all meta.

Consumers may choose brands that make them feel better about their consumption choices. People often purchase items based on how it makes them feel. However, we must demand better advertising efforts. Brands promote inclusivity while selling the same products for every skin and body type. We must recognize that marketing only benefits the brand, so change must start at the product level. If they endorse inclusivity, let's see more range added to their products.

In conclusion, woke advertising may be a gimmick used by every marketer, but it should not be lazy. When a topic is deeply discussed in society, the emotive response will be more intense. Therefore, brands must take responsibility for creating a lasting, positive impact for the greater good.