Did Dunkin' Donuts cave? They threw Rachael Ray's TV ad for iced coffee under the bus. This happened after some bloggers who are anti-Arab/anti-Mideast/anti-Muslim (take your pick) complained that Ra-Ray was wearing some traditional Middle Eastern garb associated with terrorists. And as the Bush administration has been telling us, we can't let the terrorists win, can we?
Anyway, Newsweek has an editorial by Lorraine Ali that cites the dangers of Double-D's action. Even while she takes some humorous swipes at the real danger of the ad - i.e., Dunkin' Donuts product - she clearly states her true concern for their reaction: "It's that the cries of a few commentators indulging in the worst form of racial stereotyping—and their demonization of an entire culture—was enough to spook a giant corporation."
I understand her viewpoint, but I respectfully disagree. I look at this as a marketer, and I believe that as soon as the ad became well-known for this controversy, it became ineffective. Unfortunate, but true. I believe that Dunkin' Donuts had nothing to gain by standing on principle here. A more worthy example is Proctor & Gamble's insistence on keeping their logo, even though some insist that the company has ties to Satanism. Such a stand is worthwhile for such an integral part of a company's identity, but for a single ad with an overexposed media celebrity? Hardly worth the trouble.
WNBA is totally annoying, here’s how to fix it for Caitlin Clark’s arrival
-
Professional women’s basketball is a cesspool of mediocrity full of women
gatekeeping so the sport can’t change. Fortunately, incoming rookie Caitlin
Cla...
5 days ago
Posts
Pat:
ReplyDeleteAs a marketing and media expert, you are 100% on the money. DD wasn't caving in to lunatic fringe bloggers. They were cutting their losses once an ad became the center of the storm in a rather poisonous teacup!
Just like earlier in the week, Presidential candidate Barack Obama cut ties to his church (and the other recent storm-in-a-teacup called Rev. Jeremiah Wright)... principle and "sticking to your guns" is not the point.
The point, as you say, is marketing effectiveness... and being able to put silly nonsense firmly behind you so as to enhance your FUTURE marketing messages while increasing the signal-to-noise ratio in the media.
Sometimes, practical marketing reality trumps our desire for ego satisfaction and self-righteousness.
After all, self-righteousness doesn't SELL, does it?
Great observation, Pat, and thanks for the food for thought!