Never let a good crisis go to waste

Hallmark Channel is facing another boycott. In what almost seems like a sequel to its same-sex kiss controversy last December, the company has come under fire for announcing that upcoming Christmas movies would feature LGBTQ+ related storylines.

It’s a second chance for Hallmark Channel to take a stance. By seizing this moment, Hallmark can really evolve their brand… but they have to be brave and embrace the controversy.

Okay, I will say it: Hallmark Channel needs to offend people.

Here comes the backlash!

Hallmark Channel’s main business comes from its annual “Countdown to Christmas” and “Miracle of Christmas” lineups. When Hallmark Channel recently teased 40 new movies for the upcoming holiday season, it was promptly criticized that none of the titles seem to include LGBTQ+ narratives. 

This was in itself a re-run of last year’s criticism that there was no major LGBTQ+ character in Hallmark’s 2019 Christmas lineup. At that time, then-CEO Bill Abbott declared the network was “open to really any type of movie and any type of relationship.”

Maybe anticipating the backlash this year, Hallmark was quick to reassure its queer audience. George Zaralidis, vice president of network publicity for Hallmark's parent company Crown Media Family, issued a statement that Hallmark Channel will make “some exciting programming announcements in the coming months, including announcements about projects featuring LGBTQ storylines, characters, and actors.” 

I will come back to George later, but first:

Cue the counter-backlash in three, two, one...

At this point, the story feels as predicable as a Hallmark Christmas movie: Christian conservative group One Million Moms called for a boycott of Hallmark Channel and its related products. The petition gathered close to 21,000 signatures in 24 hours. At the time of writing, it has been signed by over 70,000 supporters. 

The big question is: Will Hallmark Channel flip-flop again? Or have they learnt their lesson and leverage this controversy for building their brand?

When controversy builds brands

Hallmark Channel faced a very similar situation last year when airing the now-infamous same-sex Zola ad. To cut the whole story short: Hallmark first bowed to pressure from conservative activist group One Million Moms and pulled the commercial. This in turn caused a firestorm from the LGBTQ+ community. After three days, Hallmark’s CEO Mike Perry issued a public apology and promised to reinstate the ad. A month later, Hallmark Channel’s CEO Bill Abbott exited the company.

The whole situation was pretty bad - for the Hallmark brand and people involved.

In my analysis of this first round, I pointed out that the core problem seemed to be that Hallmark was following a standard PR playbook that simply is not relevant any longer.

An army of PR consultants have drilled into CEO’s heads that they must appease online criticism regardless of whether the violation they are accused of is “real or perceived.” While this is good advise for crises that are triggered by faulty products or illegal behavior, it can be detrimental for what I call moral-based controversies.

In my research with Brock University (Journal of Marketing Management article here, see also video below), I show that companies can utilize a radically different strategy when being accused of moral wrongdoing: They can take a stance and fight back against their critics. Instead of appeasing, they can even fan the flames and say “you can be offended, but we can also not care because we don’t share your value system.” 

I call it the ‘escalation strategy.’

Fashion company Diesel, for example, lost 14,000 followers after they showed support for Pride Month in 2019. Instead of apologizing, Diesel celebrated getting rid of people who don’t share their value system:

“Thank you! ??” for unfollowing, and “bye bye!” read the caption of an Instagram post.

Escalating a controversy can benefit a company if done right. Protein World reported to have gained more than 30,000 new customers and ￡2 Million new sales whilst fighting back against its critics. Nike’s online sales jumped 31% after standing by its Colin Kaepernick ad and its stock price reached an all-time high just days after people were burning their running shoes on social media.

Why and when escalation can be the right strategy

The escalation strategy works because moral-based firestorms are inherently ambiguous events. Whether or not a company has committed any moral wrongdoings is first and foremost a matter of perspective. 

It all depends on the value system a person subscribes to in his or her life.

And peoples’ value systems are moving farther and farther apart. American society is not only massively polarized but also divided into various hidden tribes that come with their own codes, values, and even facts. Furthermore, the extreme wings of the progressive and conservative sides are highly organized on social media and are served by fringe digital media outlets. 

It is therefore no wonder that according to research from 2016, over 60% of online controversies are based on charges of moral misconduct. My guess is that this share has only gone up since then.

When facing moral outcries, brand managers should therefore ask themselves:

1. Is the critique justified based on the brand’s own value system?
2. Is the critique coming from the polarized wings of society, or shared by the majority of the population?

If the actions that triggered the firestorm are aligned with a moral positioning the brand is comfortable with having (e.g., the brand is on the right side of history, is aligned with their target audience) and if the brand is attacked by actors from the fringe, it is a good opportunity to fight back.

Hallmark’s second chance for taking a stance

Hallmark seems to be willing to evolve and become more inclusive. Hallmark’s CEO Mike Perry, back in January, promised that the company will become “more inclusive and celebrate our differences”. Hallmark Channel’s recently announced Wonya Lucas as its new CEO. Lucas, who has previously overseen Atlanta’s NPR and PBS stations, brings experience and perspective to move the company past its recent flip-flopping and vague promises.

However, I am worried that Hallmark wants to have its cake and eat it, too. 

Back to George: In his recent announcement that LGBTQ+ storylines are in the works, Hallmark's VP emphasized that the company is "committed to creating a Hallmark experience where everyone feels welcome.” Yes to more diverse storylines, but when it comes to the rest of the statement... George needs to be stopped.

His sentiment sounds nice, but I don’t think it’s achievable in today’s post-consensus environment. Hallmark is trapped at the center of a cultural tug of war. The only way for them to escape is to confront one of the sides that pull on the ends of the rope. 

In other words: Hallmark must offend... someone

It’s a difficult position for Hallmark Channel given its largely conservative audience. I personally hope that Hallmark will evolve its programming and become more inclusive. But even more, I hope that they will act decisively.

That would include going forward with LGBTQ+ content while embracing the moral outcry that without a doubt will follow. I would love to see Hallmark not only respond to supporters but also engage with its critics in ways that clearly outline their moral position.

Taking a stance decisively and embracing the controversy would send a much more powerful signal than trying to mingle through. It’s Hallmark’s chance to redefine Christmas and become “an iconic and beloved brand”, as Lucas envisions. 

Even if it’s not ‘beloved’ by everyone.