Work that Matters

The most engaging seminar I attended today was Coca Cola’s “Work That Matters.” Jonathan Mildenhall, VP of Global Advertising Strategy and Content Excellence, presented a series of Coke ads that attempted to bring awareness to social issues and causes, starting in the ‘50s with ads geared towards challenging racial prejudice to present-day campaigns that aim to mediate national conflicts (India/Pakistan ad). The ads were charming and effective; the whole theater seemed to be touched by the magic of Coke. I myself felt nostalgic seeing the Mean Joe Green ad—I remember going to the Coke museum in Atlanta as a kid and seeing this ad in the video booth. Coke, probably more than any other brand, effectively uses pathos and emotional connections to their brand to retain their consumer base.

During the presentation, however, I couldn't help thinking about the potential backlash for brands/organizations that champion certain social causes. Do you risk compromising a brand’s image/consumer base by championing taboo social causes, such as racism and LGBTQ rights? The obvious answer is yes, there is always a risk involved when you take a stance on a social issue. But sometimes backlash could actually help your brand; case in point, a recent Cheerios ad featured a biracial couple and their mixed-race daughter. While the ad drew a lot of negative comments on YouTube (go figure), the criticism actually brought more attention to the issue of racial prejudice and, consequently, got more people talking about Cheerios. People want to feel that they are taking part in social change; causes such as KONY, the End It movement, the HRC’s marriage equality Facebook profile-picture change, and even Bennetton’s Unhate campaign are all examples of how people will align themselves with a cause purely to feel connected and righteous. Companies like Coke, who effectively connect their brands with a social cause, garner business from people who feel good for purchasing products associated with social issues.

However, an issue that companies (even adored corporations like Coke) face with this kind of advertising is authenticity (buzzword!). Consumers can tell if companies aren't ingenuous in their philanthropic efforts. A few of my fellow students and I met Chris Pearce, the Managing Director at the TMW agency, who wasn’t very impressed with one of Coke’s ads. He said he didn’t see what Coke’s role was in the story of a Brazilian garbage-collector; yes, it might have been “awareness-raising,” but it seemed more like Coke was benefiting more from this man’s story by convincing people if they bought soda, they’d be impacting lives less fortunate than their own. I had to agree; though I think Coke does have some excellent campaigns that have brought about a lot of good, this one missed the mark. It’s important to remember that publics are aware of pretense in advertising—in the words of David Ogilvy, “the consumer isn’t an idiot; she’s your wife.”

That being said, I did experience a mild epiphany during the Coke seminar. Previously, I have thought that effecting social change would require me to do PR for nonprofit organizations or independent agencies; in fact, my exact words were “I wouldn’t feel comfortable working for corporations like Coke who simply want to sell products.” But seeing Coke’s “Work that Matters” presentations made me realize that even big corporations can be philanthropic, and brands have an enormous power to bring attention to social issues that smaller organizations simply cannot wield. Now it doesn’t matter to me what size company I end up working for, as long as I can create work that matters.                          

(blog for Tuesday, June 17th)