BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Will Taking A Stand On Election Laws Hurt Brands?

This article is more than 3 years old.

With the country so divided, is it wise for corporate America to take a stand on political issues like election laws?

Consider these recent news items: Dozens of CEOs and C-level leaders gathered in April on Zoom to plot what big businesses should do next about new voting laws under way in Texas and other states. Major League Baseball in April pulled this year's All-Star Game out of Atlanta in protest of Georgia's new restrictive voting law. In March 2021, 72 Black executives signed a protest letter in the wake of changes to Georgia’s voting laws.

According to The Wall Street Journal reporting about the CEO Zoom call, “Kenneth Chenault, the former chief executive of American Express Co., and Kenneth Frazier, CEO of Merck & Co., urged the leaders to collectively call for greater voting access, according to several people who attended.”

This was a week after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said that it is "stupid" for corporations to take stances on divisive political issues.

"So my warning, if you will, to corporate America is to stay out of politics," McConnell told reporters at an April news conference in Louisville. "It's not what you're designed for. And don't be intimidated by the left into taking up causes that put you right in the middle of one of America's greatest political debates."

Brand experts don’t see it that way.

“Brands, companies, celebrities—all have the ‘right’ to be ‘political’ and express their opinion just like citizens,” says brand expert Jane Cavalier. “This isn’t new. Brands have spoken in the past, and sports brands have spoken in the past.”

Cavalier points out that back in 1991, the NFL pulled the 1993 Super Bowl from Phoenix after Arizonans voted against making Martin Luther King Jr. Day a paid holiday. In 2016, the NBA pulled the 2017 All-Star Game from Charlotte, N.C., because of the so-called "bathroom bill," which restricted access for transgender people.

“I say the critics are censors trying to suppress amplified voices,” says Cavalier, who led strategic planning for clients of McCann-Erickson worldwide, the world’s largest advertising agency. She also has taught as an adjunct professor at the Yale School of Management and NYU Stern School of Business.

Concurring with Cavalier is Courtney McKenzie Newell, a multicultural marketing expert and author of FutureProof: The Blueprint for Building a Brand GenZ and Millennials Love.

"The MLB’s decision to move the All-Star Game out of Georgia was not only a powerful display of corporate allyship, but also a huge step in the right direction of showing how companies need to lead. This action empowered players, MLB Fans, future fans and players; but more importantly it empowered other large corporations to stand in their convictions. Corporations have an obligation to use their positions of power to drive change and to make an impact when it counts most.”

But with blue versus red America so divided, could there be financial blowback to buinesses? Former president Donald Trump, among others, are calling for boycotts of brands like Coca-Cola.

“Consumers not only expect them to lead with conviction, but are requiring it,” says Newell. “Consumers now more than ever before are making conscious purchasing decisions, they support brands that support the causes they care about and are willing to cancel the brands that don’t. In order to future proof themselves, brands must be willing to take bold stances, use their voices for good and be willing to speak up when other brands are unwilling to do so.”

What is interesting to Cavalier is that brands are finally taking the risk to join the conversation to amplify voices that are often muffled. She pointed out Nike’s support of Colin Kaepernick, who was forced from the NFL for his protests during the National Anthem.

“You can’t muffle a powerful brand,” says Cavalier. “And guess what, there apparently is little downside business risk. That risk is unfounded. Nike only benefitted from its support of Colin Kaepernick. And, now that it is unfounded, brands are letting loose to help build a better world according to the values they share with their constituents.”

Follow me on Twitter or LinkedInCheck out my website