Polarizing
M&M’s announced the break-up of its mascots by saying they’d become “polarizing,”—a perceived knock at some of the brand’s critics that helped win news-cycle attention.
“We wanted from the beginning to create a stir, create a conversation and get people involved, which we seem to have done,” Carroll said.
Many news outlets covered the initial story as though M&M’s had given into its critics, but the increasingly absurd storyline around Rudolph—she had her face printed on lentils, changed the name to Ma&Yas and eventually pushed a clam-filled candy—showed M&M’s comedy hand.
“A couple of times during the process Luiz reassured me, saying ‘Look, they’ve got to know this a gag, a goof, like crazy absurd,’” Carroll said. “The brand is about belonging but it starts with fun, and if we ever lose that, we’ll kind of lose ourselves.”
The multifaceted campaign helped M&M’s win more than its share of Super Bowl pre-game hype, a period during which consumers were deciding on which snacks to buy for the game.
“Ninety percent of what happens is two weeks leading up [to the Super Bowl] so we said, ‘let’s participate in that,’” Carroll said. “So we got on this conversation about [how] the story arc has got to be interesting enough, funny enough to carry. And that’s where Luiz and the team have been brilliant. This is a really multi-touch digital campaign—the only linear shot we’re going to get is on [Super Bowl] Sunday.”
Carroll professed the brand all along wanted no part of the culture wars. “I don’t want to be trite, but we are here to use fun, and the power of fun, to help more people feel like they belong. That’s out of our values, and our corporate values, and our brand values. That’s what we’re on the planet to do with this brand.”
As to critics such as Tucker Carlson, Carroll said: “People are going to say what they’re going to say, that’s life. I think we’re happy that we are out there promoting a message of positivity, promoting a message of fun, promoting a message of inclusion, and diversity of views, diversity of opinions.”