The Anatomy of Online Brand Boycotts: Lessons from Starbucks, Disney, and Skechers
In today’s interconnected world, social media has become a powerful tool for consumers to express their opinions and hold brands accountable. A recent study by media intelligence provider Carma delves into the dynamics of recent online boycotts targeting Starbucks, Disney, and Skechers, offering valuable insights for brands navigating the complex landscape of digital activism. The study analyzes social media conversations and dominant narratives surrounding these boycotts, shedding light on how quickly online movements can gain traction and the factors that contribute to their success or failure.
The boycotts examined in the Carma study were largely fueled by the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, with online activism concentrated primarily in Malaysia and Indonesia. Platforms like X (formerly Twitter) served as central hubs for discussion and mobilization, amplified by influential accounts and established movements like Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS). The use of hashtags, such as #BlockOut2024, played a crucial role in spreading awareness and coordinating collective action. These online campaigns demonstrate the increasing power of digital platforms to translate real-world events into impactful online movements with tangible consequences for brands.
Starbucks became a target after its Workers United union expressed support for Palestine on Twitter. The subsequent legal action taken by Starbucks against the union for refusing to remove the tweet ignited a widespread boycott, fueled by the hashtag #BoycottStarbucks. Notably, this boycott gained momentum organically, without a centralized organizing force. Consumers voiced support for local coffee shops, highlighting a growing preference for local businesses over global corporations. A collaboration between Starbucks and BTS member Taeyang further complicated the situation, with some fans celebrating the partnership while others expressed concern that it might overshadow the boycott. The controversy surrounding Adidas’ decision to drop model Bella Hadid due to her support for Palestine also impacted Starbucks, leading to increased calls for boycotts in Indonesia. This demonstrates the interconnectedness of online boycotts and how seemingly unrelated events can fuel existing movements.
Similar to Starbucks, Disney faced a boycott after pledging $2 million and further support to Israel. This decision sparked backlash, particularly among BTS fans, who urged band members Jimin and Jungkook to cancel their upcoming Disney show. The BDS movement in Indonesia also contributed to the surge in boycott calls, particularly as Disney announced new releases. The intensity of the online movement was evident in the fact that, at one point, all top 10 trending hashtags on X relating to Disney were boycott-related. This underscores the potential for online boycotts to dominate the narrative surrounding a brand, impacting public perception and potentially influencing consumer behavior.
Skechers faced a boycott after its president, Michael S. Greenberg, expressed support for Israel. The boycott gained traction in Malaysia following the brand’s collaboration with the Olympic Council of Malaysia for the 2024 Olympics, with consumers expressing feelings of betrayal and anger. However, unlike the sustained boycotts against Starbucks and Disney, the Skechers boycott proved to be short-lived. A subsequent collaboration with ElleMen magazine shifted the online conversation, leading to a 49% decrease in negative sentiment towards the brand. This case highlights the volatility of online sentiment and the potential for brands to recover from boycotts through strategic partnerships and effective communication.
The Carma study highlights the crucial link between brand reputation and public perception in the digital age. Jeremiah Rodrigues, general manager of Malaysia and Philippines at Carma, emphasizes the importance of understanding how consumers are influenced by media and online trends. "Reputation is not just about capturing what people feel toward a brand, but also understanding how they consume and are influenced by the media," Rodrigues explains. In a crisis, this understanding becomes even more crucial. Monitoring social media trends, traditional media coverage, and audience sentiment provides a holistic view of public opinion, enabling brands to respond effectively to boycotts and mitigate reputational damage. The cases of Starbucks, Disney, and Skechers demonstrate the need for brands to be proactive in managing their online presence, engaging in transparent communication, and understanding the nuances of online activism.
The differing trajectories of these boycotts reveal the complexities of managing brand reputation in the digital age. While the boycotts against Starbucks and Disney sustained momentum, the Skechers boycott dissipated relatively quickly. This difference likely stems from a combination of factors, including the nature of the brands, their responses to the boycotts, and the specific issues driving the boycotts. Starbucks and Disney, as large multinational corporations, were perceived by some as more susceptible to pressure from boycott campaigns. Skechers, on the other hand, may have benefited from a less intense level of scrutiny and a more effective strategy for shifting online sentiment.
These cases underscore the importance of brand authenticity and consistency in values. Consumers are increasingly discerning and expect brands to align with their own ethical and moral principles. When brands are perceived as deviating from these values, they risk facing backlash and reputational damage. Proactive engagement with online communities, transparent communication, and a demonstrable commitment to social responsibility can help brands build trust and resilience in the face of online controversies. Ultimately, understanding the dynamics of online activism and the factors that influence consumer behavior is paramount for brands seeking to navigate the challenges and opportunities of the digital landscape.
The study further emphasizes the interconnected nature of online activism. The Starbucks boycott, for example, was influenced by events surrounding Adidas and Bella Hadid, demonstrating how seemingly unrelated controversies can converge and amplify existing movements. This interconnectedness underscores the need for brands to monitor a wider range of online conversations and to understand the broader social and political context in which they operate. Failure to do so can leave brands vulnerable to unforeseen reputational risks.
Furthermore, the involvement of influential figures, such as BTS fans, in these boycotts highlights the power of celebrity endorsements and fan communities in shaping brand perception. Brands that rely heavily on celebrity partnerships must be mindful of the potential for these relationships to backfire if the celebrity becomes embroiled in controversy. Building strong relationships with fan communities and engaging authentically with online audiences can help mitigate these risks.
The rapid pace at which online boycotts can escalate necessitates swift and strategic responses from brands. Delayed or inadequate responses can exacerbate the situation and further damage brand reputation. Proactive communication, transparent acknowledgment of consumer concerns, and demonstrable efforts to address the issues driving the boycotts can help mitigate the negative impact. In the case of Skechers, the collaboration with ElleMen proved effective in shifting the online narrative, highlighting the potential for strategic partnerships to help brands recover from reputational setbacks.
The Carma study provides valuable lessons for brands navigating the complex landscape of online activism. By understanding the dynamics of online boycotts, monitoring social media conversations, and engaging authentically with online audiences, brands can build resilience and protect their reputation in the face of online controversies. The cases of Starbucks, Disney, and Skechers serve as cautionary tales, highlighting the importance of aligning brand values with consumer expectations and responding effectively to online criticism.
The increasing prevalence of online boycotts signifies a shift in the balance of power between brands and consumers. Social media has empowered consumers to hold brands accountable for their actions and to express their opinions on a global scale. Brands that fail to adapt to this new reality risk facing reputational damage and losing market share. By prioritizing transparency, authenticity, and social responsibility, brands can build stronger relationships with consumers and navigate the complexities of the digital age.
The key takeaway from the Carma study is that brand reputation is no longer solely determined by traditional marketing efforts. Online conversations, social media trends, and consumer sentiment play a crucial role in shaping public perception. Brands must actively monitor and engage with these online conversations, understanding the nuances of digital activism and responding effectively to online criticism. By embracing this proactive approach, brands can safeguard their reputation and build stronger, more resilient relationships with consumers in the digital age. The cases of Starbucks, Disney, and Skechers serve as valuable case studies in the evolving dynamics of brand reputation management in the age of social media.
