In the late 1960s, at the Stonewall Inn bar in Greenwich Village, New York, several members of the LGBTQ+ community rose up against a police raid that occurred in the early hours of June 28. This incident, now known as the Stonewall Riots, turned into a global parade we now know as the Pride Parade, and June became the month in which members of the LGBTQ+ community are celebrated. As Pride has gradually become a global mainstream event, even in the hilly Balkans, companies have joined the parade, managing to turn the Stonewall Riots into what American media call rainbow or rainbow capitalism.
June, and the crown event – Pride Parade – is an opportunity for brands to ‘call’ their progressive values, to tell customers that, lo and behold, members of the LGBTQ+ population do indeed exist, and they support them in their fight for rights. However, as is usually the case with occasion-based marketing campaigns, advertisers are loudest during June. At that time, they blend in with other players who also wave flags in rainbow colors. Otherwise, support is significantly quieter, and although it seems that rainbow colors have become part of the mainstream, this year has shown that for advertisers, promoting progressive values is still (and perhaps more than before) a risky move they are not willing to take, no matter how much they boast about being inclusive and on the side of all the discriminated. The audience has proven to be more conservative than expected, and advertisers are more rainbow-washers than brave fighters for rights.
In recent months, global media have been filled with news about the backlash faced by major brands Target and Bud Light. Conservative consumers attacked Target for starting to sell products aimed at the trans community, while Bud Light outraged the audience by hiring a trans influencer in its campaign, thus hurting the feelings of part of the audience who consider the beer brand a bastion of ‘true’ American values.
Hypocritical Brands
After the scandals and hate messages that flooded social platforms, both advertisers responded rather lukewarmly, and instead of standing behind their decisions, they softened their stance: Bud Light stated in a press release that it did not intend to hurt anyone’s feelings, and Target withdrew its products. Part of the audience in Beautiful Croatia showed that we are not ready for ‘different’, as in the case of Zambia, where they vented their anger and dissatisfaction at a member of the trans community who decided to adopt a child with his wife.
As CNN recently reported, advertisers are increasingly hesitant to take a clear stance, and it seems that the narrative has taken a step back, as they adopt a more conservative approach and are less vocal. Although support for the gay community has grown over the years, acceptance of the trans population is still at quite low levels. In a survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal and Narc in the American market, as many as 43 percent of respondents stated that acceptance of trans rights has ‘gone too far’, while 33 percent believe that society as a whole has ‘gone too far’. When it comes to acceptance of gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals, a slightly smaller percentage, namely 29 percent, believe that it has gone too far.
Silence is Not Golden
Some advertisers are distancing themselves from public figures who oppose rights and/or the promotion of the LGBTQ+ population, but that is simply not enough. If they truly want to show that they are inclusive and care about their audience, they should stand by consumers because they record and remember every move they make. This, of course, does not only apply to members of the LGBTQ+ population but also to straight or, if you will, cis individuals who consider themselves progressive and appreciate any company that ‘comes out of the closet’. Or, as CNN writes, the middle ground no longer exists: either you are with a certain audience or you are not.
Silence in this case is not golden. Loud stances can, of course, alienate part of the audience from the brand and, as is the case with Target or Bud Light, affect sales results (conservatives have called for a boycott of products), but occasion-based advertising can do the same, participating in advertising campaigns during June, while neutrality or silence prevails for the other eleven months. Thus, the LGBTQ+ audience and its supporters do not resent brands that do not meddle in social issues and do not claim in their communication that they are brands with a purpose that care about everything and everyone. They resent those who join the progressive train only when it is least risky, convenient for them, and cover their ears and withdraw when they hit a mine (the case of Bud Light and Target). However, the marketing magazine AdAge notes that there are ways in which advertisers can show that they are true allies of the LGBTQ+ population without necessarily involving campaigns that could be interpreted as hypocrisy, rainbow-washing, or provocation of conservative consumers.
Advice for Advertisers
Thus, to begin with, they state that they should first sweep in front of their own door. A study conducted by The Williams Institute showed that as many as 46 percent of LGBTQ+ individuals have been discriminated against in their workplace and are inclined to hide their identity because they feel more accepted and safer that way. Companies should therefore first address the treatment of the LGBTQ+ population ‘within their four walls’ and find out what the general stance of employees, colleagues, and partners is regarding same-sex communities, the trans population, and so on. Furthermore, if they decide to be brave and support the LGBTQ+ population, they should do so throughout the year, not just ride the wave of the Pride Parade in June. Or, as AdAge writes, if you have decided to launch a campaign in June, ask yourself why not do it in December? If you are unsure, then you should ask yourself why you are doing it at all, what is preventing you from doing so, and work on that realization, not just on the Pride campaign itself. If you decide to work on a campaign that supports the LGBTQ+ community, be sure to include its members in the story.
Many advertisers make mistakes by creating campaigns based on what they think LGBTQ+ members want or what they are. Such communication is inauthentic and often based on stereotypes, and it can easily backfire, meaning it can be ‘attacked’ by both progressives and conservatives. Instead of a loud campaign, a sign of support could also be a donation to organizations and non-profits that deal with LGBTQ+ rights. They always appreciate money, and donations can be made at any time, not just during Pride Month. Donations can also be showcased on social media, which not only strengthens the connection with consumers but also gives visibility to the organization and association. Finally, an advertiser who wants to ‘come out of the closet’ must simply be prepared to provoke different reactions, divide the audience, even those who identify as LGBTQ+.
As AdAge writes, the LGBTQ+ umbrella encompasses millions of people with different values, views, and identities. However, one thing that they surely have in common is that they feel excluded. Therefore, it is not surprising that they react negatively to occasion-based Pride-marketing, often considering it exploitation, rainbow-washing. Advertisers should therefore continuously educate themselves, try to understand everyone’s perspective, and accept that there is a chance that their communication will provoke a reaction both outside and within the community they support. Thus, in the end, the LGBTQ+ population (and its advocates) do not ask advertisers to express their stance at all costs, aware of the risks. However, they want support, whether it is about sweeping in front of their door, a symbolic donation, or a global campaign, to be continuous (not just reserved for Pride), authentic, and sincere. Only then can a brand contribute to creating a better society.
