Brands may face backlash whether they take a political stand or not—what it means for marketing

Consumers care more than ever about brands’ views on political issues. But when brands take stands, they’re also more likely than ever to alienate people, even on issues that once seemed apolitical. Those findings are among the numerous details that can be gleaned from the latest Edelman Trust Barometer survey, which shows politics are getting more important even as people dread election outcomes. That leaves brands looking for ways to thread the needle by appearing to take a stand without offending consumers. More: Tractor Supply cuts DEI roles after conservative backlash Check out the latest Ad Age events and award programs More people cited election outcomes as a major worry (79%) than anything else, ahead of climate and nuclear war (both at 77%), personal safety (70%) and paying bills (60%), in a survey conducted in April. The survey covered more than 15,000 consumers in 15 countries, including the U.S. Even as many marketers have shied away from public stands on sensitive political issues, Edelman’s research suggests more consumers are making brand decisions based on politics. The trouble is, brands risk alienating people no matter what stand they take, or even by not taking one at all. “The key point is brands should not be in politics,” said Edelman CEO Richard Edelman. “But brands have to recognize that the world is political and that people are looking.” DE&I quandaries For example, in the U.S., 64% of Democrats said they’re more likely to buy brands that commit to ending racism. However, brand marketers have grown shyer about calling attention to their stands on diversity, equity and inclusion issues amid pushback from the right. The Association of National Advertisers’ Alliance for Inclusive and Multicultural Marketing (AIMM) found as much in one-on-one interviews with marketers as part of a recent study showing general progress in DE&I issues. Even when making progress on staffing, ad creative or media buying practices, marketers often said they’re reluctant to seek public attention for what they’re doing. Ad Age Small Agency Conference & Awards Join us July 23 & 24 in Boston Learn more here Ad Age recently found similar reluctance among companies about taking credit even when they showed year-over-year improvement in investing in Black-owned media. And brands have been quieter this year about Pride Month activity in the wake of last year’s backlash against Bud Light and Target. “It’s better to just walk the walk,” one chief marketing officer said on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity around the topic. That’s the nuanced response. The less nuanced response was the move by Tractor Supply to eliminate its DE&I roles, stop providing data to the LGBTQ+ advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign and stop trying to meet carbon emissions goals in the wake of conservative backlash. To talk or not to talk? Tractor Supply, in its announcement last week, came out on the side of a customer base that’s largely Republican and rural. Overall, in the Trust Barometer survey, 54% of people in the U.S. said they buy or avoid brands based on their perceived political positions, up 2 percentage points from last year. And Edelman said the shift among people on the right in buying based on politics has been faster. The Trust Barometer also found that 71% of people globally said brands must take a side on political issues when under pressure. And brands may be seen as political even without trying. The survey found that 88% of people in the U.S. believe at least some brands are politically motivated, and 46% believe more than half of brands are. What constitutes politics in people’s minds goes well beyond taking overt partisan stands. In the U.S., more than 35% of respondents believe using social platforms that host extremists is political. Encouraging voting, hiring influencers with political views and advertising near political news was seen as political by 25% to 35% of respondents. Even sponsoring the Olympics was seen as political by 10% to 24% of those surveyed. In the U.S., Edelman found consensus across political affiliations that brands should take stands on climate, fair pay, retraining workers and misinformation. The consensus is unclear about brands taking stands on public health, diversity and voter participation. Very few brands, such as Patagonia, have a political skew in their consumer base that makes it cost-free to take overtly political stands, Edelman said. A study released last year by Engagement Labs showed most brands have considerable support from Democrats and Republicans alike. Rising brand nationalism Nationalism is rising too, as more people in the U.S. and globally (especially China) say they favor home-grown brands and avoid brands from countries seen as adversaries. In a testament to the complexities of nationality, U.S.-based Procter & Gamble Co. this year has taken a hit on sales in China of its SK-II beauty products because of the brand’s roots in Japan and that country’s decision to release radioactive wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea. More people everywhere, including the U.S., are more inclined to buy products from their own countries, Edelman said. And while brands can’t change their country of origin, they can make clear in advertising when their products are made in the U.S., he said. Threading the needle “I do believe there are ways brands can satisfy both Republicans and Democrats,” Edelman said. “For example, by talking about issues that are consistent with what the brand has always stood for and serves your core constituency.” He cites Modelo, which was a bystander beneficiary of last year’s Bud Light problems, doing that with ads focusing on hard work. “No one can disagree with that,” Edelman said. “We’re cool with work.” Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty, with its Super Bowl ad focused on support for girls being in athletics, likewise took a stand that isn’t politically polarizing, Edelman said. Even on climate, he said, brands can find a fair degree of common ground, as long as they’re not embracing subsidies for electric vehicles. Another seemingly non-partisan political stance—encouraging people to vote—no longer comes out that way to people on the right, he said. SS+K, with its heritage working on Barack Obama’s successful 2012 re-election campaign, is an agency brands still turn to for help in taking positions relating to politics and social issues. But doing so overtly is dangerous and doing it successfully is nuanced, according to Nadja Bellan-White, the agency’s CEO, an Ogilvy veteran who led work on such campaigns “Courage” work for Dove in 2020 about health workers during the pandemic. “You have to navigate through it lightly,” said Bellan-White. “It’s kind of like needlepoint.” Ignoring politics is not an option, she said. “Right now there are elections in the U.S., U.K., India and France. You don’t think brands are going to have a role to play? Of course they do. It’s how they play that role.”

Brands may face backlash whether they take a political stand or not—what it means for marketing

Featured Stories