Taking A Stand: Gillette’s Latest Commercial Spotlights Controversial Advertising

Gillette has divided public opinionOpens a new window with its newest advertisement.

The ad, which references the #MeToo movement, bullying and “toxic masculinity,” has sparked widespread debate as the iconic Procter & Gamble brand proposes that men should hold each other accountable for misogynistic behaviors and attitudes in order to help shape young generations of today into better men in the future.

Not altogether surprising in these polarized times, many praise the company’s message while others call for a boycott of all P&G brands.

And while opinion may be split, this is for sure: After racking up more than 11 million views on YouTube in three days, the short film, entitled Believe, has given Gillette top-of-the-fold play in the news, on social media and even at dinner tables.

Much like Nike’s sponsorship of Colin Kaepernick in August, 2018, the widely-shared Gillette commercial has become a study in controversial advertising, putting that classic marketing slogan – “any press is good press” – to the test.

Last year, I used the Nike-Kaepernick storyOpens a new window to examine the growing trend among marketers for advertising campaigns that have a “socially responsible” focus. I noted that consumers demand “brand purpose” from the companies they patronize and engage with online as they increasingly expect organizations to share their values publicly and even take a stand on controversial topics.

Admittedly, I wasn’t the only one to make the point.

Nike triggered countless articles and TV news segments on the topic of controversial marketing, with many pointing to a direct correlation between the campaign and ensuing spikes in the sportswear company’s revenue and share price as an answer to the question on many marketers’ minds: Is the risk worth the reward?

However, controversy is not a fail-safe marketing strategy. One company’s roaring controversial advertising triumph doesn’t mean it will work for everyone.

Proof point: Pepsi’s ad in 2017 featuring Kylie JennerOpens a new window , which had to be yanked less than 24 hours after airing as a result of public outcry that the commercial trivialized social causes such as Black Lives Matter.

With that in mind, let’s take the attention paid to Gillette’s ad as an opportunity to look at the ‘nuts and bolts’ of controversial advertising. In other words, are there best practices to consider when deciding whether pushing the fold is a worthy marketing tactic for a specific brand and if so, what steps can be taken to avoid crossing the line between Nike’s Kaepernick success and Pepsi’s Jenner failure?

Asking the key questions

When companies are prepared to declare positions on highly contentious political topics – as Columbia Sportswear has regarding the federal government shutdown and the border wall – it’s important not to get swept up into controversy just for controversy’s sake.

The first step to deciding if this is the right advertising angle for any company? Marketing teams must ask crucial questions.

What is the campaign message?

Arguably the most important aspect of any campaign is the message delivery – particularly with today’s social media-obsessed consumer, authenticity is a marketing mustOpens a new window .

It’s the difference between conveying to an audience that your brand believes in and supports a cause versus making a case that your consumer product will solve a complex social issue (Pepsi: hint, hint, nudge, nudge.

To get this right, marketers need to align any marketing message, controversial or not, with their brand’s values and identity. In Gillette’s case, for instance, challenging negative masculine norms went with the company’s new tagline that played on its long-held slogan “The best a man can get” – replacing it with “the best men can be.”

It’s critical to identify the key core message of a controversial campaign, then to match it with the appropriate tone.

Who’s the target audience?

Before simply deciding to go controversial, a company must be sure the message will resonate with its target audience. Age? Gender? Race?

In some cases such as Nike’s and Gillette’s, the target audience is everybody. But that’s because they are among the world’s major brands.

For the rest of us, it’s imperative to avoid polarizing audiences unnecessarily and risk alienating valuable customers.

What’s the worst that could happen?

For any type of controversial content, marketers should consider the worst-case scenario as a step in evaluating risk versus reward.

While the “shock” factor can have value, the goal of a controversial campaign should not be to provoke anger. Rather, the point should be to create debate while simultaneously aligning the brand with a set of core values that resonates with the target audience.

Use the theoretical worst-case storyline as a framework to avoid committing mistakes that could lead to overwhelming criticism.

Best practices

Should a company decide to take on a contentious issue, there are steps that will help minimize potential backlash.

Focus on the issue

Pepsi’s mistake was its emphasis on the product. That Pepsi can help solve police-community relationships is considerably harder for audiences to accept than the notion that Gillette supports the #MeToo movement and believes society should challenge pervasive “toxic masculinity.”

Instead, the focus of any controversial ad should be the issue at hand and the accompanying social values. The company focus should be an afterthought, and presented subtly.

This type of approach can be seen in the increasingly common practice among marketers at major companies to shape dedicated campaigns incorporating their firm’s corporate social responsibility program(s)Opens a new window as an element of the message.

Keep audience engagement respectful

Taking on controversial topics can be a boost for audience engagement – which in turn increases visibility. But it’s up to marketers to ensure that engagement doesn’t get out of hand.

While audiences are far more open than ever to brands taking marketing risks, they don’t take kindly to hard-headed know-it-alls.

It’s good to enter debates online with followers, but those conversations must remain decent, and companies must be sure to acknowledge and not disparage other opinions.

What do you think of Gillette’s marketing efforts here? Are they appropriate? Comment below. If you’re not signed up for an account to comment, feel free to do so hereOpens a new window .