3 ms·

> the much more credible risk of being boycotted by a few million customers who also happen to be Musk's fans This doesn’t seem credible at all. You make it se

by zen21 4y ago

> the much more credible risk of being boycotted by a few million customers who also happen to be Musk's fans This doesn’t seem credible at all. You make it seem like he’s some kind of cult leader, which he is not. People find him fascinating as a tabloid character because he’s the richest man in the world for now. That’s all. People were fascinated by Gates, and later Bezos when they had that title, but now nobody pays them any serious attention.

throw310822 4y ago
> You make it seem like he’s some kind of cult leader Not at all (though there is certainly a small subset of... devotees). But he's definitely someone who has a huge audience. You, on your end, seem to assume that people will on their own make a negative association between a brand and one of the tens or hundreds of outlets it advertises on- one they possibly don't even read- and consequently change their spending behaviour. I don't believe this is true. I believe that the only way a brand can get reputational damage for advertising in the wrong place (and possibly for just anything) is to be singled out and subjected to a shaming campaign by multiple media. Shrugging it off as "it's just how the people behaves, we need to protect ourselves" is wilfully ignoring the main actor in this dynamic, the other media and influencers directing the public opinion.
- zen21 4y ago
  > You, on your end, seem to assume that people will on their own make a negative association between a brand and one of the tens or hundreds of outlets it advertises on- one they possibly don't even read- and consequently change their spending behaviour. I didn’t say anything about my beliefs. I’m simply explaining how brand advertising works. > I don't believe this is true. Ok. > I believe that the only way a brand can get reputational damage for advertising in the wrong place (and possibly for just anything) is to be singled out and subjected to a shaming campaign by multiple media. That is a very specific belief. Why do you believe it?
  - throw310822 4y ago
    > I’m simply explaining how brand advertising works. You just claimed to know how it works and that your opinion is correct. Maybe you could provide me with an example of a brand losing sales because of one of these negative associations- before the media had noticed it and brought it to the light. Surely if it's common practice for brands to stop advertising on media that are "uncool", there must have been events in the past that have taught them a lesson. Curious if you know any.
    - zen21 4y ago
      > You just claimed to know how it works and that your opinion is correct. No I didn’t. This is easily googled and not a matter of my opinion. You don’t need to take my word for it. > Surely if it's common practice for brands to stop advertising on media that are "uncool", there must have been events in the past that have taught them a lesson. That doesn’t logically follow. It’s simply about avoiding negative associations. Brand damage is hard to repair, so brand advertising by established brands tends to be conservative - I.e. they don’t advertise in questionable places and wait for the damage. Brand marketing is about building associations in peoples minds. Again - don’t take my word for it - do some reading about branding.

by zen21 4y ago

throw310822 4y ago

> You make it seem like he’s some kind of cult leader Not at all (though there is certainly a small subset of... devotees). But he's definitely someone who has a huge audience. You, on your end, seem to assume that people will on their own make a negative association between a brand and one of the tens or hundreds of outlets it advertises on- one they possibly don't even read- and consequently change their spending behaviour. I don't believe this is true. I believe that the only way a brand can get reputational damage for advertising in the wrong place (and possibly for just anything) is to be singled out and subjected to a shaming campaign by multiple media. Shrugging it off as "it's just how the people behaves, we need to protect ourselves" is wilfully ignoring the main actor in this dynamic, the other media and influencers directing the public opinion.

zen21 4y ago
> You, on your end, seem to assume that people will on their own make a negative association between a brand and one of the tens or hundreds of outlets it advertises on- one they possibly don't even read- and consequently change their spending behaviour. I didn’t say anything about my beliefs. I’m simply explaining how brand advertising works. > I don't believe this is true. Ok. > I believe that the only way a brand can get reputational damage for advertising in the wrong place (and possibly for just anything) is to be singled out and subjected to a shaming campaign by multiple media. That is a very specific belief. Why do you believe it?
- throw310822 4y ago
  > I’m simply explaining how brand advertising works. You just claimed to know how it works and that your opinion is correct. Maybe you could provide me with an example of a brand losing sales because of one of these negative associations- before the media had noticed it and brought it to the light. Surely if it's common practice for brands to stop advertising on media that are "uncool", there must have been events in the past that have taught them a lesson. Curious if you know any.
  - zen21 4y ago
    > You just claimed to know how it works and that your opinion is correct. No I didn’t. This is easily googled and not a matter of my opinion. You don’t need to take my word for it. > Surely if it's common practice for brands to stop advertising on media that are "uncool", there must have been events in the past that have taught them a lesson. That doesn’t logically follow. It’s simply about avoiding negative associations. Brand damage is hard to repair, so brand advertising by established brands tends to be conservative - I.e. they don’t advertise in questionable places and wait for the damage. Brand marketing is about building associations in peoples minds. Again - don’t take my word for it - do some reading about branding.