Bud Light’s recent partnership with trans activist Dylan Mulvaney has caused a stir among consumers and investors alike. The company created a special commemorative beer can for Mulvaney, which led to a $5 billion drop in market cap for Bud Light in just a few weeks.
According to sources close to the situation, no one at a senior executive level at Bud Light knew that the partnership existed. As a result of the overwhelmingly negative feedback, the company is allegedly pausing its marketing efforts and scrambling to implement a more ‘robust’ process for evaluating future influencer partnerships.
Despite the apparent internal strife, the company initially defended its partnership with Mulvaney, describing it as an effort ‘to authentically connect with audiences across various demographics and passion points.’ However, a source quoted by The Daily Wire believed that a ‘low-level marketing staffer’ made the decision.
These actions will seemingly lead the company to reconfigure its influencer partnership efforts to avoid controversial figures like Mulvaney. Publicly, however, its vice president of marketing has explained that her mandate was to change the company’s ‘frat guy’ image.
Is this incident a warning about the possible drawbacks of allowing progressive politics that do not align with the views of a company’s client base to influence corporate initiatives? Do companies believe that they must appeal to more progressive ideologies to attract younger customers, even though identity politics represent only a small portion of the population, including the youth?
They hire marketing and partnership staff who come from that minuscule percentage. That staff then do exactly what they should be expected to do: appeal to their peers. For certain companies that may make sense, but for companies like Bud Light, it shows a disastrous lack of awareness regarding what their customer base is.
It is important to evaluate the values and interests of the target audience when making decisions about influencer partnerships. Companies must ensure that they are not alienating their core consumers while trying to appeal to a smaller segment of the population.
The Bud Light-Dylan Mulvaney partnership debacle serves as a cautionary tale for companies that attempt to appeal to new politics without fully understanding their target audience. It is crucial for companies to prioritize their core consumers and values while evaluating potential influencer partnerships. What are your thoughts on this matter? Let us know in the comments below.
- Do you think Bud Light’s decision to reconfigure their influencer partnership efforts is a step in the right direction?
- What are your thoughts on the vice president of marketing’s mandate to change the company’s ‘frat guy’ image?
- Do you believe that appealing to progressive ideologies is the best way for companies to attract younger customers?
- How important do you think it is for companies to consider the values and beliefs of their target audience when making marketing decisions?
- Do you agree that allowing progressive politics to influence corporate initiatives can be dangerous? Why or why not?
- What other risks do you think companies face when trying to appeal to certain demographics or ideologies?
- Is it possible for companies to be inclusive without getting involved in political issues? How could they do this effectively?
- How can companies be inclusive without risking their business or causing controversies?