Commentary
Why Political Activism Will Be The New Brand Purpose
- by Joe Mandese @mp_joemandese, September 24, 2021
As far as epochs go, the past several years of multiple health, economic, social and political crises likely will impact consumer mindsets -- and marketing -- for some time to come.
But unlike previous game-changing historical events such as the Great Depression or World War II, this one is multivariate, …
4 comments about "Why Political Activism Will Be The New Brand Purpose".
Read more comments >
Next story loading 
Joe Mandese is the Editor in Chief of MediaPost. You can reach Joe at joe@mediapost.com.
The methodology for the study is pretty pathetic considering its global scale and there is a difference between "values" and political affiliation. The study states people want brands to push certain values (i.e. climate change). The study does not say that consumers wants brands to push political agendas or parties or "political activism" as Joe is trying to present it.
On one hand, the study argues that consumers have little to no trust in the government, yet at the same time, Joe Mandese tries to make the argument that consumers want businesses to support and perpetuate polical agendas run by people they don't trust......hardly makes sense.
This kind of research fascinates me. If I happen to love Joe Biden ---not true, by the way---and favored him over Trump in the last election---true, but without enthusiasm----will I refuse to buy a brand of tolilet paper if it supports Trump?And how will I determine that the brand supports Trump? But how many brands take public positions on politics? I suspect that the answer is not many.
Now, if I am vitally concerned about the Covid-19 epedemic and I think that the toilet paper brand feels the same way and says so in its ads---OK, maybe, that will be a deciding factor. But how often are such decisions made based on perceived brand viewpoints? Indeed, what percent of brands make it clear in their ads and other promotions that they take a stance of issues like global warming, getting vaccinated, saving the environment, etc.? I wonder if anyone has done a tally on that?
I have to admit that I have recently found myself struggling to include affiliations in my decision-making criteria. Should I switch to AT&T, potentially a better service, but one who donates to the Treason Caucus? How could I live with myself if I did?
On the other hand, I am considering a side part.
Here's what my students have to say about Levi's versus Wranglers...
http://pjlehrer.blogspot.com/2021/09/who-is-wranglers-new-campaign-targeting.html
Personally, I think this is a bunch of malarkey. Another instance of flawed studies. I'd put stock in it if they took notes on what these survey participants felt about the various issues of the day, and then collected all the receipts of what they bought for the following month to see if their actions backed up their words.
So, let me ask you, when you're standing in the asile trying to decide whether or not to buy Windex or Glass Plus, can you tell me where those two companies stand on climate change? Racism? Deforestation? Abortion?
I'll bet that upwards of 90% of consumers don't know (or won't bother to read the fine print on the label) that Windex is owned by SC Johnson, or that Glass Plus is owned by Reckitt Benckiser, much less what these companies stand for on politicial or social hot-button issues, unless the bottle is plastered with stickers reminding consumers of where they stand (heaven forbid - I'd rather read about how good the product is). On top of that, I'm not sure that consumers really trust big corporations do what they espouse...
I think brands are foolish to take up hot-button social issues, as they will likely grow brand loyalty with somewhere between 30% and 70% of their consumers, at the risk of pissing off the other 30% to 70%. Great business model!
Fine to work on issues that are squarely in a brand's purvue (such as Windex's use of ocean-bound plastic, even if I'm not 100% sure what that means). Otherwise simply so the right thing within the four walls of your company and quit using your real (or sugar-coated) actions as a platform to tell us all how holier-than-thou you are...
We would do well to also stop propogating shoddy studies that have very little correlation to real-world action. Joe makes no secret of his political or social affiliation, so it make sense why he would want brands to jump on the suicidal political/social purpose bandwagon.