RIP Twitter

[n_huffhines]

Did the VP of Marketing say that the longstanding image of Coors Light was the problem and this was a new direction for the brand?

I'd also argue that the T in LGBT is the most currently debated issue and that BL singled out that one. Had BL put a rainbow on the can I doubt we'd be having this conversation.

Do you have a quote from the BL VP saying their image was a problem?

Pretty sure people lost their minds about the can before any of this other stuff came to light. At least I didn't know about singling out trans on social media (dear God, what have they done) for a few says and the VP's comments this week

 

[volinbham]

Do you have a quote from the BL VP saying their image was a problem?

I'm sure it's been posted many times in these threads - it's a video discussing her rationale for the use of influencers.

 

[n_huffhines]

I'm sure it's been posted many times in these threads - it's a video discussing her rationale for the use of influencers.

I've seen the quote where she says something along the lines of changing how the brand is perceived, but I didn't see any quote about their image or customer-base being a problem, as I've seen people claim but not support. I suspect it's one of those things where people are just looking to get offended, and she didn't actually say anything offensive.

You guys are telling me that anybody could have predicted this massive cancel culture reaction to BL from the right, but I've been told so many times, again and again, that the right is different when it comes to cancel culture. Amazing.

 

[volinbham]

I've seen the quote where she says something along the lines of changing how the brand is perceived, but I didn't see any quote about their image or customer-base being a problem, as I've seen people claim but not support. I suspect it's one of those things where people are just looking to get offended, and she didn't actually say anything offensive.

You guys are telling me that anybody could have predicted this massive cancel culture reaction to BL from the right, but I've been told so many times, again and again, that the right is different when it comes to cancel culture. Amazing.

the quote begins with her talking about declining sales which she then links to the brand perception and how her new campaign is designed to change that perception. that is the very definition of repositioning a brand - something you typically do when you are shifting from one target market to another - it recognizes you are moving away from some existing customers.

enough with the "you guys told me" generalizations.

I haven't told you that the right is different when it comes to cancel culture. I'm explaining why backlash to the decision was predictable (not the magnitude) because of the dynamics of the timing, the choice of influencer, the comments of the VP and the slow reaction. I've studied, taught and practiced Marketing for 30 years. It's a classic f-up that evidences a fundamental lack of understanding of the customer base. As to the magnitude issue the current world of social media amplification and the unpredictability of influencers should have at least helped BL recognize that backlash could get big.

 

[n_huffhines]

the quote begins with her talking about declining sales which she then links to the brand perception and how her new campaign is designed to change that perception. that is the very definition of repositioning a brand - something you typically do when you are shifting from one target market to another - it recognizes you are moving away from some existing customers.

Dude, come on. And people are supposed to be offended about repositioning their brand? Gimme a fkn break. This is where you got "problem" from?

enough with the "you guys told me" generalizations.

I haven't told you that the right is different when it comes to cancel culture.

I didn't say "you guys told me." I carefully used different wording, so you threw yourself in there. The 2nd part of the point wasn't about you. It's about the deniers. And since you brought yourself up...you may not have specifically said the right and left are different with cancel culture, but you definitely spent considerable time arguing semantics about boycotting vs. canceling when I made the case that the right and left were the same.

 

[RikidyBones]

Yet nobody can explain why every other company can get away with putting a rainbow on stuff and going woke on social media, including Coors Light.

Because it's not about gay lesbian or bi with BL. What do you think this is? Why do you think they would single out budlight but not Miller?

You can't say the base is full of bigots if Miller went unscathed. Can you advise us on the differences?

 

[n_huffhines]

Because it's not about gay lesbian or bi with BL. What do you think this is? Why do you think they would single out budlight but not Miller?

You can't say the base is full of bigots if Miller went unscathed. Can you advise us on the differences?

Why can't I say it's based on bigotry again? Because they're only bigots against transgender people? LOL. That's still bigotry.

I get it if Bud Light is saying something political, but all they did was acknowledge the existence of trans people. They didn't say "let trans play sports." They didn't say "let kids chop off body parts." It's just outreach to another market segment.

 

[volinbham]

Dude, come on. And people are supposed to be offended about repositioning their brand? Gimme a fkn break.



I didn't say "you guys told me." I carefully used different wording, so you threw yourself in there. The 2nd part of the point wasn't about you. It's about the deniers. And since you brought yourself up...you may not have specifically said the right and left are different with cancel culture, but you definitely spent considerable time arguing semantics about boycotting vs. canceling when I made the case that the right and left were the same.

1. Repositioning is designed to shift the image of a brand and yes it recognizes that the shift will alienate some existing customers. It's a pretty basic concept in Marketing.

2. I maintain that there is a difference between boycotting and cancelling; not all boycotting is a canceling attempt and not all canceling requires boycotting.

You seem to be conflating your not understanding why the BL move would offend some people with the fact that it should have been predictable that it would offend some people. I'm sure the BL VP didn't think it would offend customers but that was her mistake of not understanding the customer base and substituting her views for theirs; which seems to be what you are doing. All that matters is how the customers perceive it and it was predictable that some would react this way. The strategy change should have received more scrutiny but I (speculation) guess people might have been afraid to question it since questioning these things can result in negative consequences.

 

[RikidyBones]

the quote begins with her talking about declining sales which she then links to the brand perception and how her new campaign is designed to change that perception. that is the very definition of repositioning a brand - something you typically do when you are shifting from one target market to another - it recognizes you are moving away from some existing customers.

enough with the "you guys told me" generalizations.

I haven't told you that the right is different when it comes to cancel culture. I'm explaining why backlash to the decision was predictable (not the magnitude) because of the dynamics of the timing, the choice of influencer, the comments of the VP and the slow reaction. I've studied, taught and practiced Marketing for 30 years. It's a classic f-up that evidences a fundamental lack of understanding of the customer base. As to the magnitude issue the current world of social media amplification and the unpredictability of influencers should have at least helped BL recognize that backlash could get big.

It's astonishing that no one was able to dictate the simple 101 lesson to stop it on the VPs team. Not one. I'd wager fear of losing their job was a part of that and that's a crappy worl environment, especially in marketing where opinions should be able to differ.

 

[volinbham]

Why can't I say it's based on bigots again? Because they're only bigots against transgender people? LOL. That's still bigotry. You're accidentally proving a point I wasn't even trying to make and that you're trying to disprove, LOL.

I get it if Bud Light is saying something political, but all they did was acknowledge the existence of trans people. They didn't say "let trans play sports." They didn't say "let kids chop off body parts." It's just outreach to another market segment.

whether she recognized it or not the VPs comments indicate it's not just outreach; it was a perceived shift.

 

[RikidyBones]

Why can't I say it's based on bigotry again? Because they're only bigots against transgender people? LOL. That's still bigotry.

I get it if Bud Light is saying something political, but all they did was acknowledge the existence of trans people. They didn't say "let trans play sports." They didn't say "let kids chop off body parts." It's just outreach to another market segment.

You are linking the two as the same. So with that link that YOU made, I'm saying it doesn't square if Miller went unscathed but BL didn't because of "Pride". It's also not simple outreach and expansion.

But let's focus on the actual inquiry. Why do YOU think the two reactions are different?

 

[n_huffhines]

1. Repositioning is designed to shift the image of a brand and yes it recognizes that the shift will alienate some existing customers. It's a pretty basic concept in Marketing.

2. I maintain that there is a difference between boycotting and cancelling; not all boycotting is a canceling attempt and not all canceling requires boycotting.

You seem to be conflating your not understanding why the BL move would offend some people with the fact that it should have been predictable that it would offend some people. I'm sure the BL VP didn't think it would offend customers but that was her mistake of not understanding the customer base and substituting her views for theirs; which seems to be what you are doing. All that matters is how the customers perceive it and it was predictable that some would react this way. The strategy change should have received more scrutiny but I (speculation) guess people might have been afraid to question it since questioning these things can result in negative consequences.

88 was saying this dumpster fire was completely predictable and I was disagreeing with him, and then you got involved. It was carrying over from another thread, so you may not have understood what you were agreeing to, but from my perspective, it sure seemed like you did.

Obviously, people were going to get butthurt. People got butthurt about rebranding Coke Zero. I just don't know how anybody could know the reaction would be this charged. It's crazy.

 

[SamRebel35]

According to Huff, not buying beer is considered cancel culture. It is right up there with generating online mobs to harass people, dox them, and get them fired. Same.

 

[volinbham]

88 was saying this dumpster fire was completely predictable and I was disagreeing with him, and then you got involved. It was carrying over from another thread, so you may not have understood what you were agreeing to, but from my perspective, it sure seemed like you did.

View attachment 548443

I agree it was predictable. The magnitude wasn't predictable but the backlash among some customers was predictable. If I was part of the marketing team when this was proposed I would have brought the concerns to the conversation (assuming it wouldn't negatively affect me given the topic).

Most of the objections in the thread seem to be "i'm not offended - why should anyone be offended" which fails on the fundamental concept of Marketing. That's my point all along. BL did not understand their core customers and likely assumed their own views represented the views of their core customers. Classic marketing mistake.

 

[n_huffhines]

I agree it was predictable. The magnitude wasn't predictable but the backlash among some customers was predictable. If I was part of the marketing team when this was proposed I would have brought the concerns to the conversation (assuming it wouldn't negatively affect me given the topic).

Most of the objections in the thread seem to be "i'm not offended - why should anyone be offended" which fails on the fundamental concept of Marketing. That's my point all along. BL did not understand their core customers and likely assumed their own views represented the views of their core customers. Classic marketing mistake.

Of course. I tried to edit in time to cover that.

 

[volinbham]

Of course. I tried to edit in time to cover that.

Some clarification:

the magnitude wasn't predictable in the sense they could forecast this amount of lost sales. what was predictable though was that it could get really bad or not be bad at all. what has occurred was in the realm of possibilities and proper risk assessment would factor that in.

Coke knew they would lose some customers with New Coke but the magnitude was much, much larger than they expected

Oldsmobile knew they would lose some customers with the It's Not Your Father's Oldsmobile campaign but the magnitude was much larger and it turned out to be the final nail in the coffin for the brand.

Chick-fil-A may have known if the CEO made some comments about gay marriage it might offend some customers but it turned out to me so big that cities made rule barring Chick-fil-A among other reactions.

So, it should be no surprise that things can go sideways really quickly with these type decisions so proceed with extreme caution. In watching the video of the VP she comes across as completely oblivious to any risks from the move. I'm not surprised she's been effectively reassigned. Interestingly, no one was fired in the New Coke decision because it was driven from the top.

A negative reaction was predictable; a major negative reaction was a known potential outcome though harder to assess in terms of likelihood.

 

[C-south]

Why can't I say it's based on bigotry again? Because they're only bigots against transgender people? LOL. That's still bigotry.

I get it if Bud Light is saying something political, but all they did was acknowledge the existence of trans people. They didn't say "let trans play sports." They didn't say "let kids chop off body parts." It's just outreach to another market segment.

They celebrated a year of someone’s delusion that’s constantly being forced down peoples throats. Not everyone wants to participate in someone’s mental illness and damn sure don’t want to celebrate it.

 

[theFallGuy]

Elon Musk suspends Twitter user who created pedophile flag | Daily Mail Online

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Elon Musk suspends Twitter user who created pedophile flag | Daily Mail Online

Who in the **** was deranged enough to create a pedophile flag?

 

[RikidyBones]

Some clarification:

the magnitude wasn't predictable in the sense they could forecast this amount of lost sales. what was predictable though was that it could get really bad or not be bad at all. what has occurred was in the realm of possibilities and proper risk assessment would factor that in.

Coke knew they would lose some customers with New Coke but the magnitude was much, much larger than they expected

Oldsmobile knew they would lose some customers with the It's Not Your Father's Oldsmobile campaign but the magnitude was much larger and it turned out to be the final nail in the coffin for the brand.

Chick-fil-A may have known if the CEO made some comments about gay marriage it might offend some customers but it turned out to me so big that cities made rule barring Chick-fil-A among other reactions.

So, it should be no surprise that things can go sideways really quickly with these type decisions so proceed with extreme caution. In watching the video of the VP she comes across as completely oblivious to any risks from the move. I'm not surprised she's been effectively reassigned. Interestingly, no one was fired in the New Coke decision because it was driven from the top.

A negative reaction was predictable; a major negative reaction was a known potential outcome though harder to assess in terms of likelihood.

To me, given the perception the VP had of the base, a major negative reaction was wholly predictable as the effort was to pivot the desired customer base. Of course those numbers are hard to present given they are really harsh but cut that in half and it's still significant enough kill the campaign let alone to review with FGs and test it more extensively. I am confident they would have found it was a suspect move if they did their due diligence.

 

[volinbham]

To me, given the perception the VP had of the base, a major negative reaction was wholly predictable as the effort was to pivot the desired customer base. Of course those numbers are hard to present given they are really harsh but cut that in half and it's still significant enough kill the campaign let alone to review with FGs and test it more extensively. I am confident they would have found it was a suspect move if they did their due diligence.

I get the impression they didn't do much of this at all (which is part of the problem).

Even a cross reference of polling data on trans issues to the base would likely show the negative end of the trans issues was overrepresented in the base.

The fundamental question of which beer drinkers will either switch to BL or increase their consumption of BL if we switch our image couldn't have yielded an answer that said the gain will more than make up for the loss. I honestly think they didn't even consider it (or more likely substituted themselves for their customers) even though the data could easily predict the other direction.

The irony is that the more commentators mock people for leaving BL, the deeper the problem gets and the more permanent the change in beverage choice becomes.

 

[n_huffhines]

Pretty interesting segment about Yoel Roth's experience at Twitter. He was the 2nd most recognizable name in the company and quit over the blue check thing because he was head of trust and safety and he didn't want his name to be associated with the decision to change from verified to Twitter Blue. He's actually pretty nice about Elon, considering Elon tried to get the outrage mob after him for quitting.

Also, the opening segment is amazing. I wouldn't wanna meet the person who doesn't enjoy that tale.

What I Was Thinking As We Were Sinking - This American Life

 

[NashVol11]

This guy is so weird. We killed KD for having a burner, and this is next level.

View attachment 548290

Pure clown behavior, but people get oddly defensive if you say that

 

[ButchPlz]

I get the impression they didn't do much of this at all (which is part of the problem).

Even a cross reference of polling data on trans issues to the base would likely show the negative end of the trans issues was overrepresented in the base.

The fundamental question of which beer drinkers will either switch to BL or increase their consumption of BL if we switch our image couldn't have yielded an answer that said the gain will more than make up for the loss. I honestly think they didn't even consider it (or more likely substituted themselves for their customers) even though the data could easily predict the other direction.

The irony is that the more commentators mock people for leaving BL, the deeper the problem gets and the more permanent the change in beverage choice becomes.

Here's the thing- as much as we want to believe companies actually use data to make decisions, in a world of weird gut reactions and wanting to lead the charge on certain initiatives data goes out the window. Mistakes and insanity are happening way too often now.

I'm seeing it in my world even more. It's not marketing, but I've essentially used piles of data to identify some huge issues in contract structures we deal with, but to avoid offense to anyone (or admitting that things have been done wrong the past several years) nobody wants to take up the cause for truth (and fixing the problems) with me. I think it's the same in marketing now- like someone said earlier, pointing out the issues can cost you your job in a world where apparent failure doesn't. Why risk it?

 

[Franklin Pierce]

NBCUniversal's head of advertising Linda Yaccarino 'in talks to become the new CEO of Twitter' as Musk says new female boss will start in less than six weeks

The head of advertising for NBCUniversal is in talks to be the new CEO of Twitter, it was reported on Thursday - hours after Elon Musk announced he had hired a woman for the role, without naming her.

Musk has not yet revealed the identity of his new CEO. He has slashed around 70 percent of Twitter's staff since buying the firm for $44 billion, including its entire executive team.

On Thursday evening, The Wall Street Journal reported that Linda Yaccarino is in talks to become the new CEO.

Yaccarino currently works as chair of global advertising and partnerships at NBCU, has been with NBCU for more than a decade.

Linda Yaccarino is reportedly in talks to be the new CEO of Twitter

She played a central role in the launch of NBCU's ad-supported Peacock streaming service.

NBCUniversal's head of advertising Linda Yaccarino 'in talks to become the new CEO of Twitter' | Daily Mail Online