I mean, they're not trying to please everyone, just the loudest few.
.
A lot of people don't actually enjoy when a company tries to force them to deepthroat other peoples' sex lives or politics for an entire month (we have election campaigns for that), especially when all those same people ever wanted from the company was a cookie, or a half decent game
To be accurate, the whole point of capitalism is trying to please their target market. They make surveys to gauge how people would react if they did and if they didn't. Doing it means that more people in a given country see it as positive than negative, they're not catering to a minority by definition since their goal is to maximize profit.
That may have been the original point, but that's not where a lot of these companies are at currently.
.
Many of them literally force this stuff on people DESPITE consistent negative feedback. Look at Nickelodeon ffs. No one alive wanted their child ambushed with that Blues Clues bullshit they tried to pull.
.
Marvel and DC have all but destroyed the American comic book industry by attacking their main market audience (men), and catering to absolutely no one at all (unless you believe the majority actually want superheroes swinging from their armpit hair and discussing misgendering at the fertility clinic in a damn batgirl comic). They survive almost exclusively on life support from the manga industry
.
We keep being told that the MAJORITY of the population is white - and yet companies like Coca-Cola and pizza hut are telling the MAJORITY that they're everything wrong with society
And further still - weirdly - the marketing doesn't make sense.
.
Being told that buying Oreos means you support transgenderism doesn't make the majority of people want to buy Oreos. They may buy them in spite of that, but it's going to be the very rare few that go "well I never had an Oreo in my life, but guess I'm starting now."
.
YOU may personally like it, but don't be confused into thinking these marketing campaigns are remotely designed to appeal to a "majority"
Lol I'm not confused, I just see the surveys they use to gauge how well their campaigns will be received. They paint a pretty clear picture. I also don't like it or not.
Marketing today relies a lot on values, identification and emotional proximity to the brand. Brand image is key now. It seems counterintuitive maybe, especially if you think the value still relies mainly on the product, but it's how it works. If you don't believe me, I can recommend books. More like "I'm gonna start eating Oreos because they support transgenderism", they're getting regular customers. You're gonna have transgender people talking about it (popularity, exposure), maybe some influencers would put them in their videos, posts or whatever kids are into these days, and more importantly, a brand isn't alone on the market. For someone to which this cause is important, it can tip the balance in their favor compared to a competitor. If they were really upsetting the majority they'd tank and wouldn't do it again.
As for Coca-Cola and Pizza Hut, I've looked it up and saw that the former has indeed had a racist power point; but I didn't see any marketing campaign that included telling white people they're wrong with society. Intern and extern communication are very different. And still I'm not saying I'm a specialist of these brands, obviously, so feel free to link a campaign where they've attacked their customers. Maybe it's also somewhat regional -although I really doubt it.
(also capitalising majority the second time was a weird one, telling any group they're everything wrong with society based on race is majorly fucked up even if they're not white).
"like "I'm gonna start eating Oreos because they support transgenderism", they're getting regular customers."
.
^ that's....literally what I said.
.
They are not trying to appeal to the majority. They are trying to appeal to a very select group of people and banking on the concept that their regular customers will be too addicted to their brand to put in the effort to find someone new. Or too uninterested in being the target of the bullying campaigns that tend to go after anyone who doesn't go along with them.
.
The majority don't actually enjoy being forced by brands to take park in other peoples' sex lives for a month at a time. They either don't care, or they dislike it. These campaigns are not designed to appeal to them.
.
Just like Gilette's campaign telling men to be better. Wasn't designed to appeal to men. Gillette didn't go out of business over it, but that in no way means it APPEALED to their consumers.
No, you said that they'd buy it in spite of it or very few would be first-time customers, I'm speaking of an occasional customar becoming regular, a whole other thing.
Ok so good to know Coca-Cola and Pizza Hut didn't tell their white customers they were problematic. About Gillette who "believed in the best in men", I agree it was bad, and indeed, it has tanked -contrary to the effect of pride month. This specific campaign was a flop because of obvious flaws in it: the brand could be considered legitimate to talk about this subject, as Gillette's been associated with "the best for a man" for decades, but they didn't do it in a meaningful or relevant way at all.
Yet their intent, their goal, was to polish their brand image with this as 70% or 75% of customers (depending on the sources) say they expect the brands they buy to adress social issues. So...trying to APPEAL to their customers.
The sheer audacity of you getting sassy because I didn't address every single portion of your comment after you clearly cherry-picked portions of mine is as bizarre as it is disingenuous and hypocritical.
.
And, no, That's literally NOT a whole other thing because the customer they're hoping to convert to a regular in this example is not a majority. At this point I can only assume we're reading different dictionaries when it comes to the meaning of the word, but either way I'm not interested in going round and round a dozen more times chasing your goal posts
.
If you truly believe the majority of people want an entire month being harassed by alphabet tokenization campaigns meant to appeal to an excruciatingly small portion of the population, from brands that don't give a shit, for products entirely unrelated, all I can say is you're entitled to that lol
I was actually interested in Coca-Cola and Pizza Hut telling the MAJORITY of their customers they're wrong for being white, and that's such a big thing that not addressing it led me to the conclusion it hadn't happened, which is good. Not my fault you felt itchy over that.
You didn't mention those customers at all, so I did, and said they're different than the ones you mentioned. Which sources do you have to support your claims? Cos indeed, you are going round and round, without substance.
Am I saying they're doing it in a non-irritating way, no. Yet, do they make sure their campaigns will be well-received by the majority and check if they'd gain customers through their surveys, yes. Am I saying they're catering to the 70% (majority) of people who want brands to take positions on social questions, yes. Because I am indeed gladly entitled to numbers and facts. I'm just explaining their thought process and some basic marketing concepts.
.
A lot of people don't actually enjoy when a company tries to force them to deepthroat other peoples' sex lives or politics for an entire month (we have election campaigns for that), especially when all those same people ever wanted from the company was a cookie, or a half decent game
.
Many of them literally force this stuff on people DESPITE consistent negative feedback. Look at Nickelodeon ffs. No one alive wanted their child ambushed with that Blues Clues bullshit they tried to pull.
.
Marvel and DC have all but destroyed the American comic book industry by attacking their main market audience (men), and catering to absolutely no one at all (unless you believe the majority actually want superheroes swinging from their armpit hair and discussing misgendering at the fertility clinic in a damn batgirl comic). They survive almost exclusively on life support from the manga industry
.
We keep being told that the MAJORITY of the population is white - and yet companies like Coca-Cola and pizza hut are telling the MAJORITY that they're everything wrong with society
.
Being told that buying Oreos means you support transgenderism doesn't make the majority of people want to buy Oreos. They may buy them in spite of that, but it's going to be the very rare few that go "well I never had an Oreo in my life, but guess I'm starting now."
.
YOU may personally like it, but don't be confused into thinking these marketing campaigns are remotely designed to appeal to a "majority"
Marketing today relies a lot on values, identification and emotional proximity to the brand. Brand image is key now. It seems counterintuitive maybe, especially if you think the value still relies mainly on the product, but it's how it works. If you don't believe me, I can recommend books. More like "I'm gonna start eating Oreos because they support transgenderism", they're getting regular customers. You're gonna have transgender people talking about it (popularity, exposure), maybe some influencers would put them in their videos, posts or whatever kids are into these days, and more importantly, a brand isn't alone on the market. For someone to which this cause is important, it can tip the balance in their favor compared to a competitor. If they were really upsetting the majority they'd tank and wouldn't do it again.
(also capitalising majority the second time was a weird one, telling any group they're everything wrong with society based on race is majorly fucked up even if they're not white).
.
^ that's....literally what I said.
.
They are not trying to appeal to the majority. They are trying to appeal to a very select group of people and banking on the concept that their regular customers will be too addicted to their brand to put in the effort to find someone new. Or too uninterested in being the target of the bullying campaigns that tend to go after anyone who doesn't go along with them.
.
The majority don't actually enjoy being forced by brands to take park in other peoples' sex lives for a month at a time. They either don't care, or they dislike it. These campaigns are not designed to appeal to them.
.
Just like Gilette's campaign telling men to be better. Wasn't designed to appeal to men. Gillette didn't go out of business over it, but that in no way means it APPEALED to their consumers.
Ok so good to know Coca-Cola and Pizza Hut didn't tell their white customers they were problematic. About Gillette who "believed in the best in men", I agree it was bad, and indeed, it has tanked -contrary to the effect of pride month. This specific campaign was a flop because of obvious flaws in it: the brand could be considered legitimate to talk about this subject, as Gillette's been associated with "the best for a man" for decades, but they didn't do it in a meaningful or relevant way at all.
Yet their intent, their goal, was to polish their brand image with this as 70% or 75% of customers (depending on the sources) say they expect the brands they buy to adress social issues. So...trying to APPEAL to their customers.
.
And, no, That's literally NOT a whole other thing because the customer they're hoping to convert to a regular in this example is not a majority. At this point I can only assume we're reading different dictionaries when it comes to the meaning of the word, but either way I'm not interested in going round and round a dozen more times chasing your goal posts
.
If you truly believe the majority of people want an entire month being harassed by alphabet tokenization campaigns meant to appeal to an excruciatingly small portion of the population, from brands that don't give a shit, for products entirely unrelated, all I can say is you're entitled to that lol
You didn't mention those customers at all, so I did, and said they're different than the ones you mentioned. Which sources do you have to support your claims? Cos indeed, you are going round and round, without substance.
Am I saying they're doing it in a non-irritating way, no. Yet, do they make sure their campaigns will be well-received by the majority and check if they'd gain customers through their surveys, yes. Am I saying they're catering to the 70% (majority) of people who want brands to take positions on social questions, yes. Because I am indeed gladly entitled to numbers and facts. I'm just explaining their thought process and some basic marketing concepts.