SNL had a funny sketch a couple seasons ago starring Alec Baldwin, where he played an ad exec pitching the Cheetos business. Every idea that was pitched was anchored to a current social cause that had absolutely nothing to do with Cheetos, and the client loved every idea more than the last. You can check it out here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imUigBNF-TE
At the time, I found it funny but also just completely random. Since then, however, I’m reminded of this sketch almost weekly - whenever an ad has any sort of socio-political undertones.
I recently stumbled upon a video of Jeff Goodby giving a presentation at an ad school, where he shared work that his agency had done for Doritos - a stunt celebrating gay pride. Doritos had created a limited-edition run of rainbow-colored Doritos to show support and allegiance with this cause. As no surprise, the stunt was received with a combination of both praise for the bravery of the brand, and of course, harsh criticism from the conservative portion of the country. And it all made for a good case study video.
The interesting thing was, the Cheetos sketch and the Goodby video were released pretty much at the same time. Which got me thinking that the SNL writers must have been mocking that specific Doritos stunt, just using a different artificially-flavored (albeit delicious) Frito-lay brand.
And the thing is… it has every right to be mocked.
Don’t get me wrong, the goal and intentions of this stunt are admirable. And this is a cause that should be supported. But for the love of God, what the fuck do nacho cheese-flavored corn chips have to do with gay pride?
I’m honestly so sick of brands feeling the need or the responsibility to attach themselves to social and/or political causes. Nobody is looking to Doritos to take a strong stance on anything. Other than maybe cheese-to-chip ratio.
It’s not just Doritos. And it’s not just gay pride - pick a cause du jour, there will be a brand attached to it. Whether it’s candy. Soap. Mops. Chewing gum. I saw an ad recently that showed an old man who tells the story of how he grew up in an era where he was ashamed of being gay, but towards the end of the commercial he gets to experience his first gay pride parade at the age of 86. Which is a wonderful message. Until the commercial resolves on a 5 gum logo. Cue Debbie Downer trombone.
Yes, it’s a very political time. And everyone feels the need to be on the right side of history. Even brands. And the truth is, it can be a powerful, poignant and relevant message when the right brand supports the right cause. But that cause HAS to make sense for the brand. It has to be ingrained in their DNA, their very reason for being. Otherwise it just comes off as completely disingenuous… and, being in advertising, it just reeks of a ploy to build buzz and help the agency win awards.
The reason I bring this all up is because I keep seeing articles – whether from Adweek, AdAge or otherwise – that speak to the importance of brands attaching themselves to a cause. The fact that consumers expect brands to do this. And if they don’t take a stance, they’ll lose business.
Shit, I haven’t conducted any surveys about this. But if that’s true, that’s really sad. I don’t buy things based on whether a company supports a certain issue. It would never even occur to me to think about that. I’m just buying a fucking Ring Ding here. Sure, if I find out the CEO of a company is a total bigot, racist or sexist - it would probably make me think twice about buying from that company or supporting them in any way.
But it doesn’t work the other way. I am completely fine if Starbucks never tells me their stance on abortion. I really don’t give a shit. And if they ever do, regardless of their stance, it will strike me as faker than a purple Dorito.
No, sir - give me more of the below type of silly shit please. A simple whistling nose will give me a much better feeling about your brand:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT3TGzZ91Sk
Dan Tucker is a NYC-based Creative Director. He has written for dantuckerwrites.com.