2 ms·
The act of taking a beer with a strong existing brand that's popular among a mixed demographic that skews slightly Republican, and then marketing it with a "bla
by strken 2y ago
The act of taking a beer with a strong existing brand that's popular among a mixed demographic that skews slightly Republican, and then marketing it with a "bland safe commercial" that intentionally uses a transwoman as the ambassador for said brand, is pure wishful thinking.
Okay, yes, you and I agree that we're not offended by the ad and it's not going to change our beer-drinking habits. We are not the only people on this earth.
The performance and aggression come from this silly dance where I say "if it caused impactful boycotts against the brand and made marketing departments afraid of using transpeople in ads, then despite my opinions it was neither bland nor safe" and then you say "but my opinion is that it should have been bland and safe". We don't live in that world. We should not stick our heads in the sand and pretend we live in that world, nor should we lash out at the world for failing us. We should learn from the failure of the campaign to achieve either commercial or activist success.
Is "please don't do activism when it's obviously going to be counterproductive" so ridiculous to you?
- djur 2y agoThe promotion was not activism! Jim Beam did an an actual ad campaign with Ru Paul's Drag Race at the same time. Travis Tritt (who supported the Bud Light boycott) tried to get people to go after them, too. It went nowhere, as had most attempts to protest LGBT marketing. Even Bud Light had done much more overt pro-LGBT campaigns before. The difference was that Ben Shapiro had Mulvaney in the crosshairs and A-B fumbled the response. Again, the question isn't whether the ad campaign was good, but what it says about Graham's definition of "woke".