When Brands Take Stands and Consumers Take Sides
Social issues have made both headlines and tag lines, as corporate philanthropy and brand marketing take a highly visible turn toward activism. Will it help the causes they promote?
This past week, the country was captivated by a Gillette ad that took a stand against toxic masculinity to evolve its longstanding brand promise, “the best a man can get.” The memes quickly marched out across social media, followed by takes for and against, and think pieces wrapping the ad in challenging cultural context. It came full circle, as recorded in a Tweet from a woman who overheard a Tinder date end with: (Him) “I get where it was coming from, but I think the Gillette ad went too far.” (Her, getting up from the table): “I think this date is over.”
A few months ago, Nike produced the same catalyzing effect when it prominently featured former quarterback Colin Kaepernick as the cornerstone of its 30th anniversary “Just Do It” campaign. The ad copy — “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” — was a direct reference to Kaepernick’s on- and off-field protest of police brutality; activism which may have cost him a job. The ad sparked wide-ranging commentary both pro and con, including calls for boycotts and shoe burning videos, but in the end boosted both shares and sales for Nike.
Prominent social issues now make both headlines and tag lines. Traditional corporate philanthropy and brand marketing have taken a highly visible turn toward activism, a strategy that reflects consumers’ changing expectations about the societal role of companies. A 2018 Global Strategy Group study found 81 percent of Americans in agreement that “corporations should take action to address important issues facing society,” with 76 percent agreeing that corporations should “stand up for what they believe politically, regardless of whether or not it is controversial.”
Nonprofits are sometimes benefitting from the trend. As part of the campaign, Gillette will donate $3 million over three years to organizations “designed to help men of all ages achieve their personal best,” beginning with the Boys & Girls Club of America. Such efforts can backfire, however: at the height of the migrant children crisis, support organization Raices very publicly refused a $250,000 donation from Salesforce, citing that company’s work with the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.
Depending on your politics (and whether you agree with the creative execution), it can be exciting or enervating to see brands, leveraging the millions they’ve invested in consumer recognition, raise the bar on social issues. But if these campaigns can't provoke real discussions — and not simply polarized reactions — then the tactic may burn out long before any actual change can take place. Social problems have, of course, deeply complex systemic and cultural roots that can’t be unpacked in a 30-second spot. Brands have proven highly effective at lighting the spark, but a long-term strategy and ongoing dialogue is necessary to produce real change. Three examples of another approach:
The Conference Board is one organization bringing together corporations, nonprofits, and others in the social change ecosystem to look at the present and future of corporate social responsibility. A podcast series, moderated by Global CSR & Philanthropy Council and Corporate Social Responsibility Council Program Director Jeff Hoffman, featured a thoughtful discussion about what priority setting for social impact actually looks like inside a big company.
Ad Council President & CEO Lisa Sherman, in conversation with tech leaders supporting a campaign to advance girls’ participation in STEM noted that would-be competitors must become collaborators in order to create meaningful sector change.
Carolyn Berkowitz, President & CEO of the Association of Corporate Citizenship Professionals, calling for an evolution in corporate social responsibility, frames the question this way: “Is your company doing right — not just by your shareholders, your communities, or your employees — but by America at large?”
Corporations, and the brands they manage, have the resources and clout to influence the dialogue on social issues — and as Gillette demonstrated, an ad can be the fastest and most effective conversation starter. But a fully aligned social responsibility effort is needed to move us from taking sides to standing up for meaningful change.
