A quick note: There are curse words in this episode of Meaningful Impact. If you’d prefer, you can listen to this censored version.

Introduction

This episode is the first of a two-part series which will be both a cautionary tale and a much-needed reminder that it’s still possible to make a meaningful impact for marginalized people even in today’s supposedly ‘Go woke: Go broke’ environment.

We’ll begin with the cautionary tale, by looking back at the Bud Light boycott which cost its brewer, Anheuser-Busch, $1.4 billion in annual revenue.

Remarkably, it all began with a minor, sponsored Instagram post, by a trans woman named Dylan Mulvaney. Reaction to her Bud Light post was particularly strong among anti-woke activists, who were offended by what they viewed as ideological propaganda. The protest was inflamed by a video by musician Kid Rock, who filmed himself shooting five cases of Bud Light with a machine gun.

Kid Rock: “Grandpa is feeling a little frisky today. Let me say something to all of you and be as clear and concise as possible.”

With his machine gun, Kid Rock shoots cases of Bud Light.

Kid Rock: “F*** Bud Light. And f*** Anheuser-Busch! Have a terrific day.”

Anti-woke activists didn’t just succeed at clawing back transgender support by one beer company. The wildly effective protest also sent a chill amongst many brands who had been embracing diversity, equity, and inclusion in their advertising and sponsorships.

Be sure to stay tuned until the end of this episode, when I’ll try to make sense of it all – and explain how purpose-driven leaders can still use their marketing budgets to support marginalized people, while reducing the risk that their company will be damaged by a boycott.

Bud Light’s #EasyCarryContest

The boycott against Bud Light was so overwhelming that you could be excused for thinking that the beer company advocated for underage children to have gender transition surgery without parent permission. Or that Bud Light was somehow trying to convince Americans to allow biological boys in girls’ sports or girls’ bathrooms.

But that’s not what happened. At all. Instead, the infamous Bud Light campaign was supposed to promote a standard contest, offering the chance to win $15,000 by posting a video to social media with the hashtag #EasyCarryContest, timed to occur during the March Madness college basketball tournament.

The contest was accompanied by a mainstream commercial called ‘Magnet.’ The setting for the commercial was a crowded bar, jam-packed with happy people. A conventionally-attractive male bartender serves five large glasses of Bud Light to a conventionally-attractive woman, who impressively carries all five glasses at the same time through the crowded bar to deliver the beer to her appreciative friends. The on-screen text says: “Refreshing Taste that’s Easy to Enjoy.” The end. Nothing controversial.

To amplify the campaign beyond traditional online advertising, Bud Light encouraged social media influencers to participate, offering them compensation and sometimes gifts in return.

For the sake of authenticity, brands like Bud Light usually allow social media influencers to write their own scripts and infuse their own style into sponsored social media posts.

This is where our story gets interesting.

Captiv8, an influencer-marketing agency, recruited a transgender woman named Dylan Mulvaney to partner with Bud Light. Mulvaney had, and still has, a very large online audience: now 9.4 million followers on TikTok and a further 1.5 million followers on Instagram. Among her fans, Mulvaney is perhaps best known for a daily TikTok series called Days of Girlhood, where she documented her gender transition from male-to-female. Mulvaney is also a comedian and actor, who includes the national tour of The Book of Morman among her credits.

With all that in mind, I’m now going to play audio of the 48 second sponsored post by Dylan Mulvaney which sparked the massive boycott of Bud Light. In the post, Mulvaney is formally dressed, wearing an Audrey Hepburn-style sleeveless black dress, long black satin-like gloves, and bright red lipstick. Mulvaney started the video by carrying five cans of Bud Light.

Dylan Mulvaney: “Hi! Impressive carrying skills, right? I got some Bud Lights for us. So, I kept hearing about this thing called ‘March Madness’ and I thought we were all just having a hectic month. But it turns out it has something to do with sports and I’m not sure exactly which sport, but either way it’s a cause to celebrate. This month, I celebrated my Day 365 of womanhood and Bud Light sent me possibly the best gift ever, a (Bud Light) can with my face on it. Check out my Instagram story to see how you can enjoy March Madness with Bud Light and maybe win some money too. Love ya. Cheers. Go team. Whatever team you love, I love too. OK. Love ya. OK, break a leg.”

According to insiders, Bud Light did review and approve the video in advance:

In the comments section of the post, Mulvaney wrote: “Happy March Madness!! Just found out this had to do with sports and not just saying it’s a crazy month! In celebration of this sports thing @budlight is giving you the chance to win $15,000! Share a video with #EasyCarryContest for a chance to win!! Good luck! #budlightpartner”

While listening to the audio, you may have noticed that Dylan Mulvaney refers to a gift she received from Anheuser-Busch: A custom-printed can of Bud Light with Mulvaney’s smiling face on the front and an inscription which read: “Cheers to 365 Days of Being a Woman.”

According to a Bud Light spokesperson: “Anheuser-Busch works with hundreds of influencers across our brands as one of many ways to authentically connect with audiences across various demographics. From time to time, we produce unique commemorative cans for fans and for brand influencers, like Dylan Mulvaney. This commemorative can was a gift to celebrate a personal milestone and is not for sale to the general public.”

Many anti-woke conservatives were not pleased:

Derricke Dennis, ABC News: “…Backlash brewing against Bud Light over its product placement deal with TikTok star Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender actress.

Dylan Mulvaney: “I got some Bud Lights for us.”

Derricke Dennis, ABC News: “Her post on Instagram last week, showing her surrounded by cans of beer, connected her transgender status to what has historically been a male-dominated brand.

Anti-Woke Reaction

Here’s a sampling of their reaction:

• Conservative activist Robby Starbuck tweeted: “(The) message to conservative families from @budlight seems to be: We will encourage and even celebrate the erasure of men and women along with all the values you care about. (Bud Light) has gone totally woke. Will you ever spend your money with them now?”
• Commentator John Cardillo wrote: “Who the hell at @budlight thought it was a good idea to make a grown man who dresses like little girls their new spokesperson? Brands have to stop listening to their woke creative teams and get in touch with their consumer demographics.” When Cardillo accused Mulvaney of being a grown man who dresses like little girls, he may have been referring to a comedic video where Mulvaney recreates a scene from ‘Eloise at Christmastime’, dressed as the main character, Eloise, a 6-year-old girl. Mulvaney lip syncs to: “I am Eloise. I am six. I’m a city child. I live at the Plaza Hotel, which is huge and wonderful and tres elegante.”
• Conservative Townhall.com columnist Derek Hunter tweeted: “@budlight: the groomer of beers.”

In any case, reaction to Mulvaney’s sponsored Bud Light post wasn’t limited to outrage expressed online. In fact, several Anheuser-Busch facilities were targeted with real-world threats including a bomb threat at an Anheuser-Busch brewery in Van Nuys, California.

Anti-woke activists saw the Bud Light ad campaign as woke capitalism pushing gender propaganda. The boycott of Bud Light which followed had the intention of punishing Bud Light’s support for the transgender community AND discouraging other companies that might have used their marketing budgets to promote transgender acceptance.

The Bud Light Boycott

From an anti-woke perspective, Bud Light activism was amongst the most successful corporate boycotts in modern American history. The boycott caused Bud Light to lose its 20-year stronghold as the most popular beer in America. In terms of market share, Bud Light now trails Modelo and Michelob Ultra.

In the first fiscal quarter which followed the controversy, Bud Light’s parent company reported that its US pre-tax earnings fell more than 28 percent, coinciding with a $27 billion loss in shareholder value.

More than a year-and-a-half later, Bud Light sales continue to deteriorate.

However, keep in mind, that a study published in the Harvard Business Review concluded that the long-term revenue damage is due, in part, to industry-specific factors.

For instance, grocery retailers like 7-Eleven and Walmart adjust the amount of refrigerated display space allocated to beers based on recent market share. On a busy Friday or Saturday night when consumers shop for beer, if a brand is not readily available and visible on refrigerated shelves, beer drinkers pick something else. So, as Bud Light lost market share, it also lost 7.5% of its share-of-shelf, creating a vicious cycle.

Compounding that effect: A beverage industry analyst at HSBC reported revenue declines of at least 33% for Anheuser-Busch distributors, leading Bud Light wholesalers to cut back on services and frequency of visits to retailers.

When Bud Light is not purchased at a grocery store, the beer is consumed in social settings like bars, where beer labels are often visible. As a result, some bar patrons in conservative locales chose a beer other than Bud Light to avoid the social stigma.

Making matters worse, as Bud Light’s bar sales declined, some bar owners determined that they could make more money by removing Bud Light as an on-tap option; replacing the Bud Light tap with a different beer.

In fact, the professors who authored the Harvard Business Review study of Bud Light reported that many Bud Light consumers felt “personally affronted by the brand supporting an issue they did not agree with.” Those consumers used to identify with Bud Light, but that identity-bond was broken when they saw a Bud Light can that celebrated a trans woman.

Bud Light’s Support for the LGBTQ Community

To the dismay of many in the LGBTQ community, Anheuser-Busch did not publicly defend Dylan Mulvaney. Instead, they retreated by announcing that future advertising campaigns would “concentrate on platforms that all our consumers love” with an emphasis on sports, music, and patriotism.

At AB InBev’s 2023 Q2 presentation to investors, CEO Michel Doukeris told Wall Street analysts that customers “want Bud Light to focus on beer” and that Bud Light drinkers “want to enjoy their beer without a debate.”

That represents a departure in values for Bud Light, which had been a corporate trailblazer in supporting the LGBTQ community.

For more than 25 years, Bud Light financially supported the advocacy of GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

In 1996, Bud Light launched an advertising campaign with the message: “Labels belong on beer, not people.” In the United States, the ads ran in gay-content magazines.

In 1998, Bud Light began a multi-year “Be Yourself” ad campaign which ran in gay media, featuring party scenes where apparently gay and lesbian couples are conspicuously holding bottles of Bud Light.

In 2013, Bud Light ran a subtle Facebook ad to celebrate federal recognition of marriage equality.

In 2016, Bud Light paid Ellen DeGeneres to share a promotional video which attempted to normalize a gay wedding of two men. The 30-second video, called ‘Join the Party,’ featured actors Amy Schumer and Seth Rogan:

Amy Schumer (off-camera): “The Bud Light Party here, celebrating Steve and Greg’s wedding.”

Seth Rogan: “Gay weddings: They’re just like any wedding. You’ve got cringe worthy speeches…”

Cringe-Worthy Speaker: “Can I have everybody’s attention please? This is probably the last time you’re gonna be seeing me for a while…“

Amy Schumer: “… (The) girl who’s super-ready to settle down…

Super-Ready Woman (catching the bouquet): “Get Back! Whoa! Yes!”

Seth Rogan: “…And cake! Bud Light proudly supports everyone’s right to marry whoever they want.”

Amy Schumer: “To the groom…”

Seth Rogan: “…and the groom.”

In the same election year, another video in the Bud Light Party series included a cameo by transgender comic Ian Harvie, who is seen celebrating equality while holding a Bud Light. Amy Schumer and Seth Rogan announce, “The party is for everyone: men, women, and people of all genders.”

The irony is overwhelming: Anheuser-Busch lost $27 billion in shareholder value for sponsoring a minor contest-promotion post by a transgender comedian. Yet, seven years earlier, with comparatively little fuss, Bud Light directly and specifically advocated for transgender acceptance in its own commercial.

Perhaps even more remarkably, in 2019, during Pride Month, Bud Light sold its beer to bars nationwide in rainbow-colored aluminum bottles, donating $1 to GLAAD for each case sold, up to $150,000.

Reminiscent of the LGBTQ Pride flag, the rainbow-colored bottles of Bud Light are quite striking in their appearance. The bottles are even co-branded with the GLAAD logo.

In the same year, Bud Light Canada launched a limited-edition rainbow colored can, which remarkably altered the Bud Light logo to emphasize the letters LGBT. To visualize that, imagine bolding the ‘L’ of ‘LIGHT’, the ‘G’ of ‘LIGHT’, the ‘B” of ‘BUD’, and the ‘T’ of ‘LIGHT’. Following the words Bud Light, a plus sign was added.

If you’ve ever worked on a brand team for a large company – or if you’ve ever been on the receiving end of a polite but sternly worded cease-and-desist letter from a company’s internal brand police – you already know that most large companies protect the integrity of their logos by enforcing a no alterations policy. So, I am frankly amazed that Bud Light Canada allowed its logo to be altered for any purpose, let alone to emphasize LGBT+ as an integral part of the BUD LIGHT logo.

In case that affinity wasn’t obvious enough, the tagline on Bud Light’s LGBT+ can read: “Enjoy with Pride.”

Like the Bud Light Pride bottle, you can see a picture of the Bud Light Pride can at MeaningfulImpact.com

So, here’s the kicker: With comparatively little backlash, not only had Bug Light advocated for LGBTQ causes before, Bud Light had even worked with Dylan Mulvaney before.

Mulvaney had used the same Instagram account to promote an earlier Bud Light campaign called ‘Easy to Enjoy.’ At the time, Mulvaney wrote: “Only @budlight could have a commercial so catchy it makes you wanna dance in the tub! go vote #easytoenjoy 10/10 at the link in my bio #budlightpartner.” That message was accompanied by two videos, synced together, and presented in split-screen format. On the left side of the screen, Mulvaney shared Bud Light’s Easy to Enjoy commercial. On the right side of the screen, Mulvaney posted a video of herself in a bikini top, drinking Bud Light, while dancing in a bathtub filled with bubbles. A three-level tray with over 30 standard cans of Bud Light could be seen in the background.

Yet none of those prior LGBTQ-friendly promotions, including Dylan Mulvaney’s first post for Anheuser-Busch, got celebrities angry enough to shoot cases of Bud Light with a machine gun. So, what triggered the Bud Light boycott? That’s next.

The Anti-Woke Environment

Just a few weeks before the Bud Light controversy, comedian Chris Rock released a Netflix stand-up special called Selective Outrage. Millions tuned-in to hear Chris Rock’s anticipated take-down of Will Smith following the Oscar’s slap. But, before commenting on Will Smith, Chris Rock gave voice to outrage about “woke capitalism” by roasting Lululemon:

Chris Rock: “I’m in the mall the other day. I went by that store, Lululemon. I walked by and in the window of every Lululemon there’s a sign that says: ‘We don’t support racism, sexism, discrimination or hate.’ And I’m like, who gives a f***? You’re just selling yoga pants. I don’t need your yoga pants politics. Tell me how you work on ball sweat.”

A little graphic. But point made. And Chris Rock wasn’t done…

Chris Rock: “We don’t support racism, sexism, discrimination or hate. They sell $100 yoga pants… No, no, no. Correction: They don’t sell $100 yoga pants. They sell $100 non-racist yoga pants. I think I speak for the entire audience tonight when I say most people in this crowd would prefer a pair of $20 racist yoga pants.”

Judging by the audience’s reaction, many seemed to agree that the diversity, equity, and inclusion movement had overreached.

Clearly, comedian Chris Rock, and musician Kid Rock, are not alone in their anti-woke sentiment.

Fanning the Flames

It also didn’t help that anti-woke activists could point to a then-recent interview by Bud Light’s Vice President of Marketing who described herself as having a mandate to increase inclusivity:

Alissa Heinerscheid: “So, I had this super clear mandate. Like, we need to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand… What does evolve and elevate mean? It means inclusivity.“

It means inclusivity.

But the word “inclusivity” can mean different things to different people, based on ideology.

To a progressive, inclusivity is an unimpeachably positive concept that advocates for welcoming all. What could be wrong with that?

However, to a conservative, “inclusivity” can be a loaded term used to gloss over intolerance for what they view as the mainstream.

Regardless of your own personal ideology, when you listen to the next clip of Bud Light’s Vice President of Marketing, imagine how her statement would feel to a conservative concerned with woke overreach:

Alissa Heinerscheid: “Representation is sort of the heart of evolution. You’ve got to see people who reflect you in the work. And we have this hangover. Bud Light had been a brand of fratty, kind of out-of-touch humor and it was really important that we had another approach.”

This Anheuser-Busch VP of Marketing had managed 75 people and was responsible for a 9-figure budget. She went on a leave of absence shortly after the Bud Light boycott took hold and then left the company eight months later. Her boss met with the same fate. Almost a year has since passed, yet neither former executive lists a new job on their LinkedIn profile.

Captiv8, the influencer marketing firm which pitched Dylan Mulvaney to Anheuser-Busch, laid off 20% of its workforce in the aftermath of the Bud Light controversy.

Many people were hurt by the boycott, including innocent bystanders such as Bud Light truck drivers who lost income due to fewer deliveries.

Kid Rock’s Reaction to the Boycott

In yet another irony, though Kid Rock is often credited with popularizing the boycott against Bud Light; he does not condone cancel culture, including when directed at Bud Light.

Here are edited clips of Kid Rock being interviewed by Joe Rogan ten months after the boycott began:

Joe Rogan: “So, what’s it like being the dude who took out Bud Light?”

Kid Rock: “Man, I was just having fun, to be honest with you. I mean, I was pissed, but it wasn’t like it was going to wreck my day, let alone my life.”

Kid Rock and the CEO of Anheuser-Busch USA later became friends and actually drank Bud Light together while discussing potential partnerships, which Rock ultimately declined.

In any case, Kid Rock is generally not a fan of boycotts.

Kid Rock: “By the way, I’m not into f***ing boycotts and cancel culture. Like, sending someone a message, okay – or when they’re targeting our children (or) s*** like that. There’s a fine line there. But, ultimately, I’m not into cancel culture.”

While Kid Rock has moved on from his Bud Light protest, Joe Rogan pointed out the longer-term consequences:

Kid Rock: “If anyone is still spending time on this, you clearly are f***ing bored. Find something better to do.”

Joe Rogan: “Ya, it’s definitely the pursuit of losers. But, the problem is that those losers can actually effect businesses. They know now that it’s possible, both on the right and the left.”

While Kid Rock feels that Bud Light has already “got the message,” he later seems to encourage anti-woke activists to direct their protests at other companies.

Kid Rock: “They need to know that there’s so many more businesses in this country deserving of that treatment.”

Joe Rogan: “Right.”

Kid Rock: “F***ing Ben & Jerry’s, Starbucks, Target. The list goes on and on.”

Dylan Mulvaney’s Response

In a moment, I’ll answer the Big Question. But first, let’s remind ourselves that behind Dylan Mulvaney’s campy public persona is a real person, with real feelings, who has a right to earn a living and to be herself.

Dylan Mulvaney: “I took a brand deal with a company that I loved and I posted a sponsored video to my page… What transpired from that video was more bullying and transphobia than I could have ever imagined… And I was scared. I was scared of more backlash. And I felt personally guilty for what transpired. So, I patiently waited for things to get better, but surprise: They haven’t, really. And I was waiting for the brand to reach out to me. But they never did. And for months now, I’ve been scared to leave my house. I have been ridiculed in public. I’ve been followed and I have felt a loneliness that I wouldn’t wish on anyone…. For a company to hire a trans person and then not publicly stand by them is worse, in my opinion, than not hiring a trans person at all, because it gives customers permission to be as transphobic and hateful as they want. And the hate doesn’t end with me. It has serious and grave consequences for the rest of our community…”

That audio was a collection of excerpts from a response released by Dylan Mulvaney a few months after the Bud Light boycott began.

We’ll be right back.

The Big Question

For more than 25 years, Bud Light supported LGBTQ causes without much fuss. So, the Big Question is: What changed? Why did Bud Light suddenly get so devastatingly boycotted for a sponsored post by Dylan Mulvaney?

• Was it the anti-woke political environment? Yes.
• Plus bad timing? Yes, that too.
• And bad luck? Also, yes.
• What about the custom can of Bud Light featuring Mulvaney’s face and the inscription: “Cheers to 365 Days of Being a Woman”? Yes, that visual was frequently used by anti-woke activists as evidence of Bud Light’s alleged gender propaganda.

So, yes, all those factors played a role. But the biggest factor, in my view, is that anti-woke media personalities – who were already looking for a fight – found their ‘useful villain’ in the campy persona of trans-influencer Dylan Mulvaney.

‘Useful villains’ are vilified by political influencers and operatives as a means to create fear that inspires supporters to take action.

In fact, in politics, it is a common practice for adversaries to raise the profile of their most strident or radical opponents – only to then discredit the arguments of those useful villains as if their beliefs also represented the views of the moderates in their party. That’s why some Democrats love-to-hate people like Marjorie Taylor Greene. That’s also why some Republicans love-to-hate members of the so-called Squad. They are each loved by some and vilified by others.

Applying the ‘useful villain’ tactic to the Bud Light boycott, notice that it was a transgender woman who was targeted. As Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals have become more widely accepted in society, the easier target for anti-woke activists has become the “T” in LGBT. Mulvaney was especially vulnerable to attack because of her flamboyance and notoriety.

While some conservative activists now warn companies: “Go woke. Go broke. – the truth is that what made the devastating Bud Light boycott so newsworthy was that it was so rare. Far more commonly, inclusive affinity-marketing is lucrative, by earning the loyalty of niche groups.

According to Pedr Howard, Head of Creative Excellence at Ipsos, a prominent market research firm, even when there is social media backlash, it is often very short-lived. Howard told CNN: “Social media noise isn’t the whole world. It’s often just a very small, loud microcosm.”

If you are so inclined, your company can still make a meaningful impact for marginalized groups, including transgender men and women. To help avoid becoming the target of anti-woke activists, consider doing three things differently from Bud Light:

1. Tightly control your campaign’s messaging by NOT including third-party content.
2. As the face of your campaign, choose a sympathetic character, not a controversial advocate.
3. Focus on issues for which your brand is considered an authentic and authoritative messenger.

I’ll explain how MasterCard continues to be successful doing exactly that in Part 2 of our two-part series on corporate-marketing support for the transgender community.