May 12, 2023
Photo: iStock | Roberto Galan
Did Anheuser-Busch Take a Sad Bud Light Song And Make It Sadder?
College marketing classes in the future may use Bud Light as a case study on how to take a bad business situation and make it even worse.
Bud Light’s year-over-year sales have fallen 11 percent this year, according to data from Bump Williams Consulting. Kid Rock and others have made the brand a scapegoat in the culture wars for including Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender woman, activist, actress and influencer celebrating her transition, in its inclusive social media marketing efforts.
Anheuser-Busch CEO Brendan Whitworth last month said the brewer regretted the tumult caused by its marketing campaign. “We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people,” he said. “We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer.”
The company then halted the campaign and put the executives in charge, including Alissa Heinerscheid, vice president of marketing at Bud Light, on leave.
This action, in turn, produced outrage on the part of the LGBTQ community along with others who questioned how Kid Rock, who refused to perform at venues during the novel coronavirus pandemic if they required concertgoers to be vaccinated and/or wear a mask, could get a brand to walk away from corporate values expressed over decades. Bud Light has partnered with GLAAD (formerly the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) for over 20 years.
Ms. Heinerscheid, vice president of marketing at Bud Light, speaking last month on the Make Yourself at Home podcast before the protests began, said the brand was the top-selling beer in the U.S., but its sales have “been in decline for a really long time.”
Bud Light has seen consumption fall among young adults, primarily in urban areas, who have chosen Mexican beers and other alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage alternatives.
Ms. Heinerscheid and the marketing team behind the beer brand have sought to widen its audience by eschewing frat-boy humor in its commercials and highlighting women, including Super Bowl spots that featured recording star, Lilith Fair co-founder and animal activist Sara McLachlan and Keleigh Sperry, actress and wife of Miles Teller.
“I’m not going to pretend that there isn’t so much more work to do from a business result perspective and, of course, a representation perspective, but I feel like you you have to put your money where your mouth is when you’re trying to evolve a brand and elevate it and bring in new consumers,” Ms. Heinerscheid said.
BrainTrust
Dr. Stephen Needel
Managing Partner, Advanced Simulations
Cathy Hotka
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
David Spear
President, Retail, OrderlyMeds
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
DISCUSSION QUESTION: What brand marketing lessons can be learned from Bud Light’s inclusivity messaging and its parent company’s reaction in the face of criticism?
Poll
Loading …
Prior to this social media dustup, I hadn’t heard Bud Light mentioned in years. Perhaps there’s some truth to the old chestnut “No such thing as bad publicity”
It’s 1950 again in America. The question is whether brands will think that’s a good thing.
Truly sad but accurate Cathy.
Joining a long list of brands that have tried to capitalize on DEI and have failed. Why, because it’s beer, not a message board. Any social issue we have today has at least two sides. Marketers are not in the business of picking a side, they are in the business of selling their product. The sooner they learn that, the better off they’ll be.
Sadly the polarization of our society has a way of creeping into business. Consumer-facing companies have a very difficult line to walk. Consumers identify with brands that align with their values. That includes their personal politics. This isn’t new, we’ve seen major consumer brands boycotted for business practices that offend one side of the spectrum or another. As we’ve become more polarized as a society in recent years, the tripwires that set people off have become more complicated, and actions that elicit responses from one side or the other are more acute. Add instant amplification on social media, and you have a situation that Bud Light has been navigating. They’re now in a no-win situation. By suggesting that supporting Ms. Mulveny was a mistake, they’ve, in effect, discounted her and her community, and the idea that they just want to get people together to “have a beer” rings hollow. In the meantime, their detractors have gotten so much attention blowing up cases of Bud Light they’re not likely to stop just because the company has tried to reverse its course on this.
The lesson: If you spend decades developing a specific demographic, know intimately what that demographic thinks about the world.
Anybody reading today’s discussion can search beer demographics and know Bud Light should not touch any social issue.
Doesn’t this just smack with the wisdom we should all follow in our advertising ventures? Choose a company has a little more common sense rather than one who thinks ideas should be cool?
Despite decades of LGBTQ allyship, Bud Light’s campaign was a radical departure for the brand.
Brand marketing lessons include:
• Know your audience: Your core market may resent change rather than celebrate it.
• Honor your brand essence: Avoid controversy as a marketing gimmick, as divisive issues can alienate consumers if these issues do not align with your brand’s legacy.
• Know your rivals: The sober movement and rise in innovative substitutes demand strategic discernment, as missteps are costly.
KNOW THY AUDIENCE.
Hmm, how difficult was it for senior executives at AB to look at their current Bud Light audience, which is incredibly LOYAL and evangelists for the brand, and figure out that 99% of them would likely be opposed to the new marketing campaign? This was a colossal mistake that will go down in the annals of time as one of the biggest marketing failures in American business.
99%? Maybe 5% who are vocal and angry. Bud Light has done a great job marketing to LGBTQ community. There are a lot a Gay bars in this country. Now they’ve alienated all of them.
There is, as we philosophers like to say, a prior question here.
How much of Bud Light’s decline can be directly linked to the inclusivity campaign? My guess? Less than anyone wants to admit.
Bud Light came of age in a different age — no microbreweries, no treating and talking about beer as if it were wine, more and larger parties, and no legal marijuana. It was a great success story, but very few stories outlive their times, and every beverage has its season.
Now, if we want to focus on the inclusivity messaging the marketing lesson is that if you hold a really big target over your head and wave it until your arms fall off somebody — in fact, many somebodies — are going to take a shot at you. In a highly polarized society you can’t win by provocation. Either the “Woke Folk” will find something wrong with your messaging to prove it really isn’t inclusive enough or the QAnon Crowd will, as in the case of Kid Rock, literally use your brand for target practice. Increasingly, both things will happen.
Brands face tough choices today. They can either take a position on social and cultural issues because they believe in it or they think enough of their addressable market believes in it, or they can stick their heads in the political – in the broadest sense – of the word – sand.
Excellent point. AB has been actively buying craft breweries because that’s where the market has been going. Bud Light has been in decline for a long time.
Did they partner with Dylan because she was a fan of Bud Light and the partnership was organic, or was the collaboration just a way to check off a box for inclusivity within Anheuser-Busch? If it was the former, Bud Light should stand behind their choices and not reprimand it’s employees.
Altho most of the controversy has focused on Mulvaney’s identity as a person,, I would focus instead on the identification as an “influencer”(a concept which those familiar with my posts will know I have no love for.)
Couple that with “activist”, and the red flags are waving pretty strongly.
So am I saying companies should shy away from controversial figures??
Not exactly, but I am saying there’s a risk of the controversy upstaging your product.
Okay. The beer is…awful. And then you put out a campaign that is well intentioned (I am going with that) but tone deaf to actual Bud Light customers and potential customers.
So, a bad product combined with bad messaging and you have a social media firestorm, PLUS sales going down by, last time I checked, 23%.
So, maybe the lesson learned is, in my view making sure you continue to understand your market and serve that market. Just my view.
AB lists over 20 brands in its portfolio. Each should have its own brand story and clientele it targets. To undermine its most valuable and largest brand is treason.
The 1950s comment reminds me of David Ogilvy’s quote “The consumer isn’t a moron; she is your wife.” Executives at AB apparently thought otherwise.
Yes, each and every A-B action has made the situation worse.
1. Someone at A-B should have recognized right from the start that this Dylan Mulvaney influencer effort could be a disaster. I imagine that at least 40% of Bud Light core customers consider Mulvaney a fraud. Clearly, not enough people at HQ in either NYC or Belgium knows the customer.
2. The video of the Marketing Director set this on fire. She had no consideration for current core customers in her comments. In fact, the comments indicated that she looked down on core customers, calling the history of the brand “fratty, with out of touch humor”. She also came across that she was smarter than everyone else.
3. The Brazilian born CEO’s dismissive comments has added even more fuel to the fire. He characterized this entire episode as “one can, and not a campaign”, and stating that there is a lot of “misinformation”. This too can be interpreted as an insult to vote customers. In essence, current customers are “too stupid to recognize that this is not a campaign” and “we’ll fix this by increasing our ad spending by 3x.”
We will see where this goes by Memorial Day. But if Bud Light continues to be down by -25% and A-B sales continue down by -12%, the entire executive team may need to be replaced by people who know and understand the current core customer. By the way, moving HQ back to St. Louis would be a smart move as well.
I have never seen advantage in pondering campaigns that separate people. Never.
More Discussions
Should US Consumers Be as Upbeat Over Their Finances as Data Suggests?
A new study suggests U.S. consumers are rosy over their finances, but should they be?Has Storytelling Become a Rediscovered Retail Art?
Are retailers finally leaning (again) into narrative to excite?Will the Gulf Between Walmart and Target Deepen in 2026?
Will Walmart widen its lead over Target in 2026?
Prior to this social media dustup, I hadn’t heard Bud Light mentioned in years. Perhaps there’s some truth to the old chestnut “No such thing as bad publicity”
It’s 1950 again in America. The question is whether brands will think that’s a good thing.
Truly sad but accurate Cathy.
Joining a long list of brands that have tried to capitalize on DEI and have failed. Why, because it’s beer, not a message board. Any social issue we have today has at least two sides. Marketers are not in the business of picking a side, they are in the business of selling their product. The sooner they learn that, the better off they’ll be.
Sadly the polarization of our society has a way of creeping into business. Consumer-facing companies have a very difficult line to walk. Consumers identify with brands that align with their values. That includes their personal politics. This isn’t new, we’ve seen major consumer brands boycotted for business practices that offend one side of the spectrum or another. As we’ve become more polarized as a society in recent years, the tripwires that set people off have become more complicated, and actions that elicit responses from one side or the other are more acute. Add instant amplification on social media, and you have a situation that Bud Light has been navigating. They’re now in a no-win situation. By suggesting that supporting Ms. Mulveny was a mistake, they’ve, in effect, discounted her and her community, and the idea that they just want to get people together to “have a beer” rings hollow. In the meantime, their detractors have gotten so much attention blowing up cases of Bud Light they’re not likely to stop just because the company has tried to reverse its course on this.
The lesson: If you spend decades developing a specific demographic, know intimately what that demographic thinks about the world.
Anybody reading today’s discussion can search beer demographics and know Bud Light should not touch any social issue.
Doesn’t this just smack with the wisdom we should all follow in our advertising ventures? Choose a company has a little more common sense rather than one who thinks ideas should be cool?
Despite decades of LGBTQ allyship, Bud Light’s campaign was a radical departure for the brand.
Brand marketing lessons include:
• Know your audience: Your core market may resent change rather than celebrate it.
• Honor your brand essence: Avoid controversy as a marketing gimmick, as divisive issues can alienate consumers if these issues do not align with your brand’s legacy.
• Know your rivals: The sober movement and rise in innovative substitutes demand strategic discernment, as missteps are costly.
KNOW THY AUDIENCE.
Hmm, how difficult was it for senior executives at AB to look at their current Bud Light audience, which is incredibly LOYAL and evangelists for the brand, and figure out that 99% of them would likely be opposed to the new marketing campaign? This was a colossal mistake that will go down in the annals of time as one of the biggest marketing failures in American business.
99%? Maybe 5% who are vocal and angry. Bud Light has done a great job marketing to LGBTQ community. There are a lot a Gay bars in this country. Now they’ve alienated all of them.
There is, as we philosophers like to say, a prior question here.
How much of Bud Light’s decline can be directly linked to the inclusivity campaign? My guess? Less than anyone wants to admit.
Bud Light came of age in a different age — no microbreweries, no treating and talking about beer as if it were wine, more and larger parties, and no legal marijuana. It was a great success story, but very few stories outlive their times, and every beverage has its season.
Now, if we want to focus on the inclusivity messaging the marketing lesson is that if you hold a really big target over your head and wave it until your arms fall off somebody — in fact, many somebodies — are going to take a shot at you. In a highly polarized society you can’t win by provocation. Either the “Woke Folk” will find something wrong with your messaging to prove it really isn’t inclusive enough or the QAnon Crowd will, as in the case of Kid Rock, literally use your brand for target practice. Increasingly, both things will happen.
Brands face tough choices today. They can either take a position on social and cultural issues because they believe in it or they think enough of their addressable market believes in it, or they can stick their heads in the political – in the broadest sense – of the word – sand.
Excellent point. AB has been actively buying craft breweries because that’s where the market has been going. Bud Light has been in decline for a long time.
Did they partner with Dylan because she was a fan of Bud Light and the partnership was organic, or was the collaboration just a way to check off a box for inclusivity within Anheuser-Busch? If it was the former, Bud Light should stand behind their choices and not reprimand it’s employees.
Altho most of the controversy has focused on Mulvaney’s identity as a person,, I would focus instead on the identification as an “influencer”(a concept which those familiar with my posts will know I have no love for.)
Couple that with “activist”, and the red flags are waving pretty strongly.
So am I saying companies should shy away from controversial figures??
Not exactly, but I am saying there’s a risk of the controversy upstaging your product.
Okay. The beer is…awful. And then you put out a campaign that is well intentioned (I am going with that) but tone deaf to actual Bud Light customers and potential customers.
So, a bad product combined with bad messaging and you have a social media firestorm, PLUS sales going down by, last time I checked, 23%.
So, maybe the lesson learned is, in my view making sure you continue to understand your market and serve that market. Just my view.
AB lists over 20 brands in its portfolio. Each should have its own brand story and clientele it targets. To undermine its most valuable and largest brand is treason.
The 1950s comment reminds me of David Ogilvy’s quote “The consumer isn’t a moron; she is your wife.” Executives at AB apparently thought otherwise.
Yes, each and every A-B action has made the situation worse.
1. Someone at A-B should have recognized right from the start that this Dylan Mulvaney influencer effort could be a disaster. I imagine that at least 40% of Bud Light core customers consider Mulvaney a fraud. Clearly, not enough people at HQ in either NYC or Belgium knows the customer.
2. The video of the Marketing Director set this on fire. She had no consideration for current core customers in her comments. In fact, the comments indicated that she looked down on core customers, calling the history of the brand “fratty, with out of touch humor”. She also came across that she was smarter than everyone else.
3. The Brazilian born CEO’s dismissive comments has added even more fuel to the fire. He characterized this entire episode as “one can, and not a campaign”, and stating that there is a lot of “misinformation”. This too can be interpreted as an insult to vote customers. In essence, current customers are “too stupid to recognize that this is not a campaign” and “we’ll fix this by increasing our ad spending by 3x.”
We will see where this goes by Memorial Day. But if Bud Light continues to be down by -25% and A-B sales continue down by -12%, the entire executive team may need to be replaced by people who know and understand the current core customer. By the way, moving HQ back to St. Louis would be a smart move as well.
I have never seen advantage in pondering campaigns that separate people. Never.