Skip to main content

Does your brand support gay marriage?


 Our society is currently entrenched in a civil war over gay marriage.  The Supreme Court is hearing a case that challenges the constitutionality of the 1996 Federal Defense of Marriage Act.  The law narrowly defines marriage as a union between a man and woman. Nine states and the District of Columbia previously allowed gay marriage through state supreme court rulings, until voters effectively reversed the courts’ decisions.

The Supreme Court, which mirrors our polarized society, seems to be equally split on the issue.  Not only are people taking sides, but a few big brands have also jumped in to defend gay rights. I wonder if we'll start to see more brands taking a driving role as activists in our society.

For the most part, brands have avoided getting dragged into these sensitive issues. This is not surprising, as the adoption of any position can cost millions in revenue if it antagonizes a portion of the brand’s customer base.

This neutral position, however, might no longer be sustainable for a couple reasons. First is the millennial generation, American teens and twenty somethings — who are confident, self-expressive, liberal, upbeat and empowered to vote with their wallets. Second is the new digital landscape, with social networks that provide these millennials with a platform to establish and advocate their views.

According to the Pew Research Center, millennials are more ethnically and racially diverse than older adults. They’re less religious, less likely to have served in the military, and are on track to become the most educated generation in American history. They are also more liberal and tend to support same sex-marriage.

Most importantly, millennials vote with their wallets on social issues. According to a national survey, which was conducted April 8-11, 2010 by StrategicOne, millennials are more likely to buy a product or service if they like the social or political values of the company that provides it ("buycotting"). They are also more likely NOT to buy a product or service if they disagree with the social or political values of the company ("boycotting").

The survey finds that 40% percent of younger Americans surveyed said they had boycotted, and 36% had buycotted a product or service in the past 12 months based on social or political values. Older generations are significantly less likely to report boycotting and "buycotting;" age 35-44 (33% and 24% respectively), age 45- 54 (31% and 26%), age 55-64 (34% and 25%), and age 65+ (26% and 18%).

Brands such as Microsoft, Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Zynga, eBay and Nike, each with a diverse and younger work force and customer base, have already come out supporting gay marriage. As the millennium generation’s voice grows stronger in our society, more brands may need to follow suit to maintain relevance. Staying on the sidelines of the key social issues of our time may become harder moving forward.


Popular posts from this blog

The Irrational Power of Nudge Brands

Nudge brands are brands built on interactions, not attitudes. They are mostly defined by experiences, not TV campaigns. They are designed around people's inconsistencies and errors, not for machines. They are simple, not complex. They like to break things into small chunks that are less daunting than big tasks. They focus on changing behavior, not generating awareness and interest. The Paris metro system card is a nudge brand. It is designed against human errors. You can use the card in any direction. IKEA is a nudge brand. It uses the power of personal investment. The more involved people are in creating something, the better they feel about the end product. Ryanair is a nudge brand. It chunks the whole purchase process. They lock you in with a low 'seat price' first to get a mental commitment. Then, they start to add the extra charges in bite-sized 'chunks.' Hare Krishna is a nudge brand. It is built on the reciprocity rule by giving away daisies. People should …

The Curse of Advertising Resources

With more platforms, more products and more content who are trying to reach a disengaged audience, it is becoming harder and harder for brands to stand out. Conventional practices are no longer working. People don't watch TV as much as they used to, so they don't see commercials.  They don't click on banner ads. They don't pay attention to billboards ads. And they don't trust brands' messages. Part of the problem is that we are too dependent on traditional ad resources, which limits the realm of our creativity. To thrive in this new environment, we, ironically, need the freedom of a tight brief: what can you do with no budget for mass media?  Or limited marketing communications dollars?  To make a comparison, traditional advertising is a lot like countries and economies that rely on oil. This reliance handicaps innovation. Countries with a vast amount of natural resources tend to have (1) less economic growth and (2) worse development rates than other countrie…

The Engineering of Digital Consent

Today, we build brands through social interactions. People opinions online shape our decisions on what brands should we buy or endorse. 90% of customers said that online reviews influence their buying decisions. Our challenge is that consumers don't pay attention and trust the message coming from brands. So, how do we affect the opinion of others in this environment? In marketing, we spend a lot of time and money creating advertising with the hope that it goes viral. However, most of the campaigns have little influence in today's consumers. Many campaigns have even the oppositive effect, with consumers sharing negative opinions or blocking advertising altogether. Changing behavior is hard. I don't think we have a silver bullet to influence people online, but we can learn best practices from behavioral science to increase our chances. Getting a little better in predicting behavior can make a big difference. Here are four behavioral principles that we should consider when c…