Despite mockery from some mainstream media outlets about the conservative-led backlash to Bud Light’s recent ad campaign featuring a transgender influencer, it appears that Americans broadly support such measures.
“In the aftermath of an uproar over Anheuser-Busch’s use of transgender model Dylan Mulvaney to promote Bud Light beer, a majority of Americans favor boycotting the brand,” said Rasmussen Reports after a survey found that more than half support a boycott following a poll of about 1,000 adults last week. It found that some 40 percent of all Americans said that the “ transgender promotion makes them less likely to purchase Bud Light,” while 19 percent said it is more likely, and 37 percent said it doesn’t make a difference.
There was also a generational gap among respondents, as 33 percent of those aged 18 to 39 stated in the poll that they were more likely to drink Bud Light due to the promotion. That’s the largest percentage of support among the age demographics.
About 6 percent of those aged 65 and older said the promotion made them more likely to purchase the beer, and 12 percent of those aged 40 to 64 years old said they had a favorable opinion of Bud Light’s campaign, the poll found.
Notably, a majority of Americans said that major corporations—such as AB Inbev, Bud Light’s owner—pay “too much attention” to transgender issues. Only about 18 percent of respondents said corporations weren’t paying enough attention.
The company appears to have tried to make amends with its customer base by releasing an advertisement heavy on patriotism—replete with American flags and scenes of iconic U.S. landmarks—but some said that it’s too little, too late. “You aren’t putting that genie back in the bottle” said “Black Hawk Down” actor Matthew Madsen in a reply on Twitter.
Around the same time that the Budweiser advertisement was released, the CEO of Anheuser-Busch released a statement but did not mention Mulvaney or the controversy directly.
“We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people,” Anheuser-Busch InBev CEO Brendan Whitworth said in a press release. “We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer.” “I care deeply about this country, this company, our brands and our partners. I spend much of my time traveling across America, listening to and learning from our customers, distributors and others,” his statement said. “Moving forward, I will continue to work tirelessly to bring great beers to consumers across our nation.”
A public relations expert also noted that the campaign with Mulvaney is a nightmare for Bud Light, although some others said that it may have been an attempt to draw more attention to the brand.
David Johnson, CEO of Strategic Vision PR Group and expert in crisis communications, said that he would have told Bud Light to avoid “this situation,” meaning, using Mulvaney in its advertisements. “Their brand identity is Midwest, southeast, southwest, rural purchasers, conservatives, sports fans as well,” he said. “And the Mulvaney endorsement, partnership seems to go against that brand.”
Some experts, however, said the boycott probably won’t do lasting damage to Bud Light’s brand, let alone Anheuser-Busch.
The reason why, according to Pedr Howard with market research company Ipsos, is that boycotts are hard to sustain. And in some cases, it draws media hype to the brand.
The “media hype and exposure can drive mass awareness, which in turn leads to more potential customers,” he added, suggesting that some media outlets’ coverage of the boycott is essentially giving free air time to the brand.
But Johnson reasoned that the campaign with Mulvaney “seems craven, and it doesn’t seem sincere or honest … that’s why they’re suffering in comparison to Nike, who also teamed up with Mulvaney.” He explained: “Consumers have fixed ideas about various brands, like Bud Light for example.”
