Brand boycotts—how LGBTQ+, Gen Z, boomers and others respond to companies’ social stances

Calls for brand boycotts surged earlier this year after brands including Bud Light and Target faced consumer backlash for their LGBTQ+-related marketing campaigns and products. And, based on a new survey, that looming threat of anti-brand protests in response to their stances on LGBTQ+ rights isn’t going anywhere soon. More than half of consumers (55%) have boycotted a brand because they “disagreed with its position on a social issue,” and that number jumps to 80% among LGBTQ+ consumers, according to a report from customer experience platform DISQO and Do the WeRQ, a platform for LGBTQ+ advocacy in the advertising industry. The two organizations surveyed more than 10,000 consumers in May for “LGBTQ+ Advertising: From Boldness to Backlash,” a report in which DISQO and Do the WeRQ examined consumer attitudes surrounding “wokeness,” a divisive and murky term that often accompanies conservative consumers’ calls for boycotts of brands that show support for the LGBTQ+ community. Check out the latest Ad Age events and award programs “Almost every major brand that met with backlash over their LGBTQ+ support in 2023 publicly responded as though they were surprised,” said Kate Wolff and Graham Nolan—co-chair of programming and operations and co-chair of storytelling and partnerships at Do the WeRQ, respectively—in the report. “If our industry is going to continue marketing ourselves as the masters of nuance, we can’t be shocked when important aspects of consumer experience design are disrupted by obvious human concerns.” The report pointed to Bud Light and Target, specifically, which faced boycotts this year from both conservative anti-LGBTQ+ consumers and LGBTQ+ consumers and their allies. Bud Light initially showed support for the LGBTQ+ community through a partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, but quickly pulled back from that sponsorship and pivoted its marketing strategy after experiencing conservative backlash. And Target did a similar heel turn in May by removing some of its Pride Month products from shelves following a rush of social media outcry. In both instances, LGBTQ+ advocacy groups criticized the brands’ decisions to yield to conservative backlash. More: Is Bud Light football marketing enough to save the brand? See all of Ad Age’s 40 Under 40 honorees here ‘Our knee-jerk reaction is to evade’ When a brand backtracks on social issues, such as support for the LGBTQ+ community, it spurs many consumers to begin boycotting that brand, according to the report. One in five consumers told DISQO and Do the WeRQ that they would “immediately” stop buying a brand’s products or paying for its services if that brand withdrew its support for a social cause important to them; and they would also tell others that they no longer support that brand. Another 22% said they also would stop supporting the brand, but would “keep [their] thoughts about the brand to [themself].” Meanwhile, 35% of respondents said they would continue buying from the brand but simultaneously seek out a new brand that better aligns with their beliefs. This type of backtracking is often the result of brands not wanting to involve themselves in “political issues.” Abstaining from taking a stance on social issues such as LGBTQ+ rights can do more harm than good, Wolff and Nolan said. “When people became obsessed with blockchain, agencies issued crypto white papers and ideated NFT campaigns. When generative AI became the buzz, brands asked where to experiment and how they could get headlines. But as consumers have become fixated on divisive social issues, most brands and agencies say, ‘We don’t get involved in politics,’” they said. “We, the marketing industry, incessantly pat ourselves on the back for driving business with our nuanced understanding of consumers’ lifestyles. But when faced with politics—one of the most universal aspects of today’s American experience—our knee-jerk reaction is to evade.” Bud Light sales have continued to fall since it partnered with Mulvaney in April. In the aftermath, some gay bars stopped stocking Anheuser-Busch InBev products after deeming that the brewer did not come out in support of LGBTQ+ rights after the initial conservative backlash. But recent evidence suggests the brand weathered criticism from progressive groups, while the conservative backlash is still taking a toll: Sentiment among Republicans for Bud Light fell from around 60% positive in April to less than 20% positive by June, according to Engagement Labs, which conducts regular surveys regarding how Americans talk about brands face-to-face, not on social media. Democrats remained 60% positive in both periods, Engagement Labs’ figures show. Read more: Bud Light isn't the only polarizing big-name brand The report from DISQO and Do the WeRQ also investigated the effect of boycotts beyond sales. Consumers’ actions vary significantly depending on their age and whether or not they’re part of the LGBTQ+ community, the report found, with roughly 25% of LGBTQ+ consumers and Gen Z consumers saying their boycotts also involve discarding any products they already own from the brand, and nearly 50% of both consumer demographics saying they also urge friends and family to no longer buy the brand’s products or services. Older and non-LGBTQ+ consumers are more likely to simply stop financially supporting the brand and take no additional actions, per the survey. Additionally, nearly half of the surveyed consumers who have previously boycotted a brand reported never again purchasing from that brand; and, of those consumers who did eventually resume supporting the brand, 60% only did so once the brand had shifted its stance on the social issue that initially led them to boycott it. “Today, brands face a higher bar for authentic allyship, and consumers will demand accountability with their wallets,” said David Grabert, VP of brand & communications at DISQO, in a press release. “Younger consumers, particularly, will make purchase decisions based on a brand's alignment with their values—and also use their voices to compel companies to listen.” Gen Z’s strong support of the LGBTQ+ community likely stems from the fact that more members of Gen Z identify as LGBTQ+ than any previous generation. A February Gallup poll found nearly 20% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+, a percentage that shrinks dramatically with each older age cohort. Just over 11% of millennials identify as LGBTQ+ and only 2.7% of baby boomers do so. Ad Age Media Summit Hear from industry leaders during October event in NYC Register here ‘Woke brands’ DISQO and Do the WeRQ also investigated consumers’ perception of the concept of “wokeness,” which typically accompanies the backlash against brands that show support for the LGBTQ+ community. While 70% of surveyed consumers are familiar with the term, perceptions of a “woke” brand differ wildly between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ consumers, as well as between Gen Z and boomer shoppers. According to the report, roughly one in three consumers view “woke brands” more positively, and that number climbs to 65% among LGBTQ+ consumers and 42% among members of Gen Z. Another 32% of respondents said they think less highly of so-called woke brands, with 44% of those “anti-woke” consumers being boomers and 37% not identifying as LGBTQ+. Despite these mixed views of brands being associated with “wokeness,” the majority of consumers agree that brands have the power to influence how society views the LGBTQ+ community and even shape political decisions tied to LGBTQ+ issues. Seventy percent of surveyed consumers said brands can impact how LGBTQ+ people are perceived, and another 62% said they believe brands can affect political decisions involving the LGBTQ+ community. “[We’re not] call[ing] for advertisers to become political entities, but we do ask for the industry to get real about how political culture is impacting our work,” Wolff and Nolan said. “The data shows that evading is not an option. Retreating is even worse, alienating both sides. And do we really want to abdicate the power of purpose in our branding?" Ad Age Gen Z Contributor Column We welcome Gen Zers to submit fresh takes exploring Gen Z within the ad industry Learn more here

Brand boycotts—how LGBTQ+, Gen Z, boomers and others respond to companies’ social stances

Featured Stories