Does BiM's decision to pull advertising in Italy for its 12 Year's A Slave campaign point to the existence of racism?

It’s not every day a film poster can spark worldwide debate and widespread apologies from several sources over the creation of content let alone once again raise questions over a Countries stance on racial equality. http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/27/controversial-italian-12-years-a-slave-poster-stirs-debate-over-movies-and-race/ If you have yet to catch up with this story I can provide a topline summary. Rather than focus promotional activity around lead actor Chiwetel Ejiofor the Italian distributors for ‘12 years a slave’ instead chose to focus on Brad Pitt, a man who plays a character with a relatively small part in the film. You might be wondering what the fuss is about. Does a decision to focus on a mainstream actor with worldwide appeal in a foreign market really spell out implicit racism? It probably isn’t a question for us to debate here but what is clear is that both BiM and Lionsgate appear to be treading carefully around the issue. The reactions from both companies might say a lot more about the supposed link between the decision making and some sort of underlying fears of discrimination. Through pulling the campaign and issuing grovelling apologies have both companies actually just blown the issue out of proportion? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/italian-distributor-pulls-12-years-a-slave-posters-that-emphasize-films-white-actors/article16124914/ It is hard to determine whether it will be Lionsgate Films or BiM Distribuzione who will bear the long-term brunt of this controversy. Lionsgate have been quick to claim they gave no permission for the film ’12 years a salve’ to be advertised in the way depicted by BiM. However, as the vendor chosen to create and distribute the content should it not be BiM who are forced to explain their motives behind advertising in such a way? Is pulling the advertisement simply enough or should they have even of pulled the material at all? Over the last year The Brand Avenger has shined a spotlight on countless companies who have failed to address issues that would ultimately damage brand reputation in a timely manner. However in this instance The Brand Avenger would argue the reaction from both entities may have only served to of fuelled further criticism and controversy. Rather than potentially sign off the content to appear in Italy Lionsgate would have played close to no involvement in the decision to feature Pitt or Fassbender as opposed to Ejiofor. BiM may have reacted in a way they felt best to communicate to their target market so it should be their role to explain the context behind the decision. Had they of done this rather than pull material so quickly the issue may have resolved itself. The speed of which it was removed may say far more about the attitudes and beliefs of both the company and the public than the actual initial questioning of how BiM chose to promote the film.

Not such a Merry Christmas? M&S in the middle of a Christmas race row

Far be it for The Brand Avenger to chime into an issue that can be as controversial as religion however I think it would be fair to say M&S will face a tricky challenge to their brand reputation following the recent news that Muslim staff have the right to refuse sales of meat and alcoholic products at till.

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/1225674/m-s-faces-revolt-muslim-staff-exemption-rules

Regardless of whether you believe it is right or wrong for religious concessions to conflict with customer service it is clear M&S are in the middle of a controversy they wouldn’t want their brand associated with. At this time of year where retail sales flourish and meat and alcohol purchases spike, no retailer wants to be at the center of a storm that leads to such polar opposite views on the rights and wrongs. 

M&S have moved quickly to issue an apology for the stance taken by the staff member, citing that as an all-inclusive business all religious concessions are tolerated and accepted. In many ways they have done everything they can to demonstrate a caring and considerate view towards the issue however will this be enough to calm the issue?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25488259

The media won’t certainly let the retailer nor the public forget about the recent news anytime soon. As long as the media continue to cover the story over the coming days M&S will spend Christmas in controversy. The exact time when the controversy will end will depend on how much of a stir is created on Twitter and how far the issue progresses. Let’s hope for the sake of the M&S brand the incident on Saturday is treated as a storm in a teacup as opposed to anything more major.

And Merry Christmas to all those who have followed The Brand Avenger this year.

Paid for complaint tweets tests British Airway's 'Fly to Serve' creative campaign

A couple of months an angry British Airways customer displayed the type of creative thinking that was so far outside the box most advertisers would be chuffed had they thought of it themselves. Taking aa dispute over poor customer service from BA following a lost bag Mt Syed decided to take out a paid for promoted ad targeting searches of the airline. The Brand Avenger wonders if Hasan Syed is just one of the growing breed dis-gruntled consumers who will fight back against injustice at any costs?

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/1224122/trend-day-co-creation-rise-hyper-disgruntled-consumer

We have all shared Mr Syed's experiences. The Brand Avenger can't remember how many times I have lost sleep over the careless actions of an airline or a apparent lack of any type of customer service. The remarkable thing about this case is the lengths Mr Syed went to to ensure BA paid for their poor handling of a stressful situation. BA may have spent millions of pounds to alter the perception of consumers that elevate their branding around a strong customer service strategy. By spending £700 Mr Hasan certainly damaged BA's positioning and left senior team members so flustered they were using BA's own social media to apologise and clarify they had resolved the situation.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/sep/03/businessman-promoted-tweet-british-airways

Access to a brand is key in todays age and unquestionably the balance of power is changing. Customers like Mr Syed are switched on and savvy. They know exactly how to make a brand pay for any perceived gaps in customer service and can damage a brands reputation with a drop of a hat. It didn't take Hasan Syed millions of pounds or months of strategic planning to generate enough publicity to communicate his intended message. David stood up to the Goliath of BA and they were left dazed and bruised by this confrontation.

As more and more of the public wake up to the fact that they have power and a voice we will begin to move to a world where brands will need to advance their messaging and media delivery.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/09/04/british-airways-angry-flier-promoted-tweets/

Mr Syed had the last laugh and the final say when it came to his public challenging of BA, and as he so vehemently boasts on his twitter in this instance he holds the victory. The real test for BA now will be how they adjust their strategy to ensure this type of glitch never happens again. The worst case scenario would be a influx of disgruntled customers using similarly creative measures to bring them to task. The only way they can truly address is to embrace the message they have spent so much money on over the last year. Wholly embracing a fly to serve ethos and promoting this through all marketing touch points should prevent against getting on the Tweeters nerves allowing BA to truly serve the needs of their customer.