Gillette's double-edge razor

No one can forget the scandalous ad by Pepsi released in 2017 featuring Kendall Jenner, a rally of (calm) protesters and the all-powerful, can of soda. According to NBC news, Pepsi was accused of appropriating a Black Lives Matter movement following "police shootings of African Americans." The ad's controversial nature encouraged Pepsi to pull the ad and they've since refrained from releasing similar content. Understandably, the ad by Pepsi raised questions in light of its timing, message and context.

In 2018, Nike also released a controversial ad featuring Colin Kaepernick regurgitating the renown Nike slogan "“Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything. Just Do It." Admittedly, this was shortly after Kaepernick kneeled during the national anthem in protest to policy brutality. Although the ad spiked debate, it felt genuine to the millions of Nike followers and consequently brought the company $6 billion in sales. 

A few days ago, Gillette too launched a controversial ad encouraging men to take action against sexual assault and endorsing messages from the me-too movement. Many progressives commended the company for its liberal take, however, many more consumers condemned the ad and threatened to boycott the razor company, according to BusinessInsider. Many posted pictures throwing their razors in the toilet and others proclaimed their switch to alternative brands. The question then becomes, why? 

According to Intelligencer, Gillette tried to profit off a politically tumultuous time by accusing men of systematic corrupt behaviour. Regardless of the truth behind this claim, the company's downfall lies in their replacement of one word. Specifically, "Gillette... inverts the company’s slogan, changing “Gillette: The Best a Man Can Get” to “The Best a Man Can Be.”...Instead of offering the man something, the slogan now asks him to do something." Intelligencer examines the implications of this change and concludes that in marketing, the brand "works for its customers, not the other way around." In essence, Gillette introduces a social-change message by accusing men of faulty behaviour and by telling them the 'correct' way of acting. 

What are the implications of Gillette's ad in a digital world? Millions of consumers, potential consumers, and non-consumers are exposed to the ad, the company's name is trending for days, and the company gains news coverage and national popularity. But, this popularity is negative. Negative popularity can destroy a brand at a faster pace than a positive popularity can inspire a purchase. So, should companies gamble their future by introducing social-change messages in their campaigns? If it's well received, it can be financially rewarding like Nike's gains. If it's bad, well just look at Gillette. I guess if it's not well received, you can also just pull the ad like Pepsi, apologize and lay low for while. 

This goes to show that in business, espousing some moral authority can be the end of you. Hopefully Gillette does recover, though. I personally like their razors...