Somebody needs to check on Kid Rock - meltdown re: trans influencer

Well, looks like not many people are buying A/B products since the issue started. Trying to compare something different doesn't hold much water when the reality is the numbers overall are down almost 12% overall.

 

Anheuser-Busch is a wholly subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV and the company as a whole is doing just fine. Even conceding that the sales of its brands are down I recall that during the 2016 season when Colin Kaepernick took a knee and the former president, a candidate at the time, called for a boycott of the NFL the league's television viewership as well as in-person attendance at games dropped although Trump probably had little to do with it. Last time I checked the NFL is doing just fine. Although the Bud Light brand specifically may be on the way out (sales of the brand had been decreasing for several years by the way), the company will do just fine.

 

LOL. Obviously you don't own a business since anyone losing 12% in a month while my competitors gained market share would cause a huge concern. Weird that the CEO seems very concerned, I guess he should consult you to help talk him off the ledge LOL.

 

Sure there is a reason for concern, just like I'm sure the NFL was in 2016. Last time I checked the League is doing just fine.
From 2016
NFL Ratings Just Fell Off a Cliff: Why?

 

Then the NFL stopped playing politics and started playing football. Brilliant move. Pretty sure we don't see A/B trotting out any Dylan Mulvaney ads anytime soon.

 

Curious. If Bud Light had an advertisment showing a cis-gendered married couple on their can, would that be "playing politics?"

 

Has Bud Light put anyone on a can before? Look, Bud Light choose to do what they did and consumers have the right to do what they want to do, and that includes stopping drinking Bud Light. IF Bud Light put an anti-abortion ad on a can or a commercial then I would also say that's stupid to do business wise. Not complicated.

 

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-cis-slur-and-the-war-on-normality/

 

Bud light is gonna double down on stupid, you can just feel it coming. No apologies, didn't fire the supposed perpetrators, blaming it all on misinformation...

 

Disagree. I think Bud Light's marketing execs will not have anything to do with Mulvaney in the future. The marketing exec behind the campaign has essentially been canned although the company euphemistically said he was taking a leave of absence. Whether they can rescue the brand or not remains to be seen but I see a completely different campaign possibly combined with discounts within the next couple of weeks.
Bud Light marketing VP takes leave of absence in wake of Dylan Mulvaney backlash: report
Their latest promo
Bring Home the Bud Lights

 

People think it’s funny, lopping off little pee-pees and little breasts. Peak sickness.

 

So know you acknowledge they need to “rescue the brand”? Glad you finally realize this isn’t some 1 week boycott that won’t affect the bottom line. This is a bad situation in A/B and they are under extreme pressure to stop the bleeding.

 

Bud Light has, in the past, used people's images, for marketing. One recent example is the Notorious BIG. Conservatives didn't suddenly accuse Budweiser of being "political." Bud also used Jackie Robinson's jersey number in a callback to his fight with MLB's refusal to let black players in the big leagues. In 1987, a limited edition can was released with MLK. Subsidiaries have used sports stars on cans.

I'm not questioning people's rights to boycott. I've made it clear in past Too Hot threads that I think it's absolutely childish to refer to people's choices in some sort of conflation of hurting [entity's] First Amendment rights by refusing to use their product/service. You are 100% entitled to deny them service. I refuse to shop at Hobby Lobby for a variety of reasons surrounding the actions of their owners.

My question hasn't been answered and that's exactly what I expected.

If a non-trans person was used in marketing, would it be political? I suspect the answer is "no." Identity shouldn't be a "political" thing. It reduces people's existence to something which is intended to cause division and pushes a narrative. Perhaps trans people just want to be acknowledged as having a right to exist and live happy lives? Being a conservative Christian isn't "political." A woman choosing to be a professional or house wife both aren't "political." Same sex couples pushing for the right to marry isn't "political." I don't understand a lot of the identities, but I'm not entitled to tell them how to live or deny/repress their existence.

 

Hold on, so Having Biggie Smalls in a commercial is political? Since when? I have news for you but most of the people who have bought Biggie Smalls music are white(myself included). Jackie Robinson jersey number is political? You are trying to make the argument that a non-trans person wouldn't be political. It's a dumb argument. Bud Light DID decide to use a trans person and it backfired immediately. Maybe it's because this trans person insults a lot of women by acting overtly feminine? All I know is it's called knowing your audience. Who is saying trans people can't exist and live happy lives? I know personally once someone is 18 I don't care what they do as long as it's not in front of children(drag shows in front of kids). I do think children shouldn't be able to have trans surgery or puberty blockers until they turn 18. The left is pushing for that so that makes it political.

 

Let me ask again since it seems to be ignored via long diatribes:

If a cis-gendered couple happens to be on a Bud Light can, is that political?

Futher question just to gauge: How and why?

 

Who can forget this all time headline?

 

They are both from Chicago, so that tracks.

 

I think there are definitely plenty of brands to this day that avoid associations with rappers and hip hop, but its probably less a thing today than it used to be. For a long time luxury brands or even Tommy Hilfiger/Polo/Abercrombie didnt want to be seen as 'too black.'