Navigating Political Waters: How to Know When Your Brand Should (and Shouldn’t) Join the Conversation
As the 2024 election season is fully underway, the pressure for companies to comment can feel somewhat overwhelming. In the middle of high-traffic news cycles, which are often born from current social and political events, leaders may be wondering whether they are expected to engage in these discussions. However, joining the conversation may not always yield positive outcomes...
Instead of automatically assuming that speaking out will resonate with audiences, leaders need to take a more strategic and careful approach.
Unfortunately, the data surrounding consumers' opinions on brand activism does not make this decision any easier. According to a survey from Morning Consult’s “Election Playbook” for brands, half of American adults (53%) believe corporations shouldn’t involve themselves in political and/or cultural issues, a figure that is unchanged from 2020. This split means that while some of your audience may support such involvement, others may not - and highlights the overall idea that the decision to get involved should really be reliant on the brand's values, audience, and overall goals.
To help navigate this difficult choice, we've identified four key considerations to guide you in making the best decision for your organization:
Analyzing Reputation Risk and Ability to Handle Backlash
Before issuing any public statement, it’s necessary for companies to thoroughly evaluate their internal dynamics, including organizational structure and employee roles that shape the company’s communications.
They should weigh both the immediate and long-term effects of speaking out, in addition to determining if they are equipped to handle potential backlash. Often, this involves having a plan or set of key messages ready to address criticism, along with the agreement to stand firm in their position, even in the face of negative reactions. Leaders and key spokespersons should be aligned and prepared to relay consistent responses, ensuring that they are not caught off guard by public scrutiny.
Timing and Context
The timing of your statement matters. Depending on the subject matter, joining the conversation as soon as possible could add value. Conversely, it can be better to wait until more is known about the issue or the sensitivity surrounding it dies down. Sometimes, abstaining until the right moment can be more impactful than a hasty response.
Authentic Connection to the Organization
Leaders should be asking if the issue at hand truly aligns with the brand’s values before involving themselves.
For example, commenting on controversial policies that directly impact a brand’s business or stakeholders makes a lot of sense. However, if the connection between the brand and the issue is unclear, they could risk coming across as opportunistic or tone-deaf, forcing themselves into a discussion that seems ingenuine.
Better Ways to Control the Narrative
What companies also fail to consider is that the traditional media route is not always the best way to convey their message.
Earned media, or the publicity a brand receives through unpaid channels (think: interviews and quotes in articles) can result in misinterpretation, especially on such divisive topics. In these cases, using company-owned channels like social media, newsletters, or blogs will allow for better control of the narrative while still reaching the target audience.
Overall, while it may feel necessary to respond to every political or social issue, strategic silence can sometimes be more beneficial than speaking out without careful consideration. If your organization is still uncertain, the help of a public relations agency can provide valuable expertise on how to safeguard your specific brand’s image while navigating sensitive topics.