In the ever-polarized world we live in, brands are no longer just providers of goods and services. Increasingly, they are becoming societal actors, stepping boldly into issues that ignite public debate. Whether it’s Nike’s ongoing support for the transgender community or Bud Light’s controversial partnership with Dylan Mulvaney, brands are making decisions that go beyond the checkout counter and straight into the hearts of societal discourse. But here’s the hard truth: the louder a brand’s stance, the sharper the divide they may create within their customer base.
Let’s talk about Nike. The company has long been a champion of progressive values, from supporting Colin Kaepernick’s protest against police brutality to its current embrace of transgender inclusivity. These actions resonate with many, earning Nike praise for being on the “right side of history.” But as the Washington Times article highlights, not everyone feels that way. In a country of free thinkers and speakers, a stand for some is often perceived as a slight to others. Nike has drawn a line in the sand, and while it may seem like the largest player in the room, the truth is this: the loudest voice belongs to the customer.
The Risk of Alienation
Recent history is full of cautionary tales of brands that miscalculated their marketing activism and paid the price.
Bud Light’s Misstep:
When Bud Light partnered with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, it sparked immediate backlash, leading to boycotts and a 20% decline in sales. In a matter of weeks, the brand lost its long-held position as America’s top beer. What seemed like a progressive move alienated a core segment of its customer base, showing just how quickly public opinion can turn.
Target’s Pride Controversy:
Target’s decision to feature a Pride Month collection with prominent LGBTQ+ themes triggered significant backlash. Some stores scaled back displays due to safety concerns for employees, and within weeks, the company lost over $9 billion in market value. While the brand’s commitment to inclusivity was commendable, the financial and reputational cost highlighted the risk of mismanaging a socially charged campaign.
These examples underscore a critical point: taking a stand can amplify your message, but it can also divide your audience, leading to financial losses and long-term reputational damage.
The ROI of Taking a Stand: Does It Pay Off?
Taking a stand is never free—it comes with real financial and reputational costs. So, what’s the ROI of stepping into the ring on divisive societal issues?
Short-Term ROI: A Mixed Bag
In the short term, marketing activism can deliver spikes in engagement and sales from aligned audiences. For example:
- Nike and Colin Kaepernick:
Nike’s campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick sparked widespread debate but also boosted online sales by 31% in just a few days. It solidified Nike’s position as a leader in progressive advertising and won multiple awards.
However, the backlash was equally notable, with some customers boycotting the brand entirely. While Nike achieved a short-term financial win, the campaign’s polarizing effect reinforced the reality that marketing activism often creates as many detractors as it does supporters.
Long-Term ROI: The Uncertain Future
The real question isn’t whether a campaign generates buzz—it’s whether it builds a sustainable business.
Bud Light’s Fallout:
The short-term controversy surrounding its partnership with Dylan Mulvaney led to a massive loss of market share. Months later, the brand has yet to recover, serving as a stark warning that poorly calculated risks can have lasting consequences.Patagonia’s Success:
On the flip side, Patagonia’s environmental activism has become a cornerstone of its brand identity. Its commitment to sustainability resonates deeply with its audience, creating a loyal customer base that sees the brand as authentic. The key difference? Patagonia’s activism aligns seamlessly with its mission and values, making it feel genuine rather than opportunistic.
For brands looking to wade into activism, the lesson is clear: authenticity and alignment with your core values are non-negotiable. Without them, the long-term ROI could be disastrous.
Reputational ROI:
Beyond dollars, brands must ask themselves whether taking a stand enhances or erodes trust. Customers are increasingly demanding authenticity from brands, but this cuts both ways. If customers perceive a stance as performative—or worse, antagonistic—they will withdraw their loyalty.
Patagonia offers a counterexample. The brand’s unapologetic focus on environmental activism has cemented its reputation as a leader in sustainability, creating a devoted customer base. But the difference here is that Patagonia’s identity is intrinsically tied to its activism—it’s not seen as a deviation from its core purpose.
The Power and Responsibility of the Megaphone
With great influence comes great responsibility. Brands that take a stand must ask themselves:
Is this stance authentic to our brand values?
If activism feels forced or performative, customers will see through it and withdraw their loyalty.Are we prepared for the fallout?
Taking a stand means accepting that a segment of your audience may never come back. Are you ready to alienate some customers in the name of progress?What does success look like?
Are you measuring success by engagement metrics or by actual impact on your audience and business goals?
Nike and Patagonia can afford to take risks because their brands are built on strong foundations. But even market leaders are not invincible—just look at Kodak or Blockbuster. These titans didn’t fail due to a lack of brand awareness; they failed because they misunderstood their customers’ evolving needs and values.
The Customer’s Voice Rules All
The loudest voice in the room isn’t the brand’s—it’s the customer’s. No matter how big your marketing budget or how bold your campaign, customers ultimately decide your fate. They vote with their wallets, and if they feel unheard, they’ll take their business elsewhere.
Brands tempted to wade into divisive waters must ask themselves:
- Are we prepared to lose a portion of our audience?
- Are we willing to prioritize values over profits—or vice versa?
- Is the potential ROI worth the risk?
The biggest lesson for brands is this: no matter how big you are, your size doesn’t protect you from the reality that your customers hold the power. The moment they feel unheard, overlooked, or outright dismissed, they’ll let you know—not through letters or complaints, but through their wallets.
Nike has the resources to weather storms, but can it afford to lose trust among the segments of its base that feel alienated? After all, market dominance doesn’t guarantee invincibility. Look no further than Kodak or Blockbuster—once titans of their industries, now relics of the past. They weren’t undone by a lack of brand awareness; they were undone by a failure to understand their customers’ evolving needs and sentiments.
The Bottom Line
Marketing activism is not inherently good or bad—it’s a calculated risk. The ROI of marketing activism depends on authenticity, alignment with brand values, and a clear understanding of your audience.
The world is watching, and the stakes are high. Before you take a stand, ask yourself: Are you ready for the consequences? Are you prepared to lose trust, revenue, or market share? And most importantly, are you staying true to your brand’s core purpose?
Because at the end of the day, the ROI you’re chasing isn’t just about dollars—it’s about trust, loyalty, and legacy. Choose wisely.
