Although the #DeleteUber campaign was created as a civil rights campaign, it still speaks to the advertising industry and branding.
After news of Trump's immigration ban, all taxis in New York were halted from taking trips to the JFK airport for one hour to protest Trump's order. Uber, however, did not follow suit. The ride-hailing app dropped surge charges and continued trips to/from the airport. Many customers were outraged by Uber's decision, claiming that the company was utilizing this strike as a means of profit.
Chicago journalist Dan O'Sullivan created the #DeleteUber social media campaign in response to the airport strike in order to encourage Uber customers to delete their accounts. This campaign took off rapidly, and more than 200,000 accounts have been deleted.
Uber's primary competitor, Lyft, has taken a different stance on the issue. The company emailed a statement to its users explaining how Lyft feels deeply affected by the Muslim ban. The company's core values (as well as our nation's) are to accept and cultivate diversity, and will not stay silent in threats that directly and negatively impact the company and the nation. Since the incident, downloads of the Lyft app have skyrocketed.
Both of these instances (Uber and Lyft) illustrate the risks of a brand taking a political stance, or getting involved in a political scenario. Whether or not Uber was actually using the protest as a source of profit, the company involved itself by having a voice during the protest. Tweeting during a large-scale, controversial political event is extremely risky, and Uber ultimately suffered from their decisions. Because the business was hurting, an opportunity presented itself to Lyft to take the opposite stance and benefit from their actions.
It is important for brands to have core values and support other causes besides their own products/services. That is how brands build and maintain relationships with their customers. However, politics can certainly make or break a brand/customer relationship.
Do you think it is wise for brands to take a political stance? In what cases might it be a good idea, and in which cases might it be harmful to the brand?
Links to Uber and Lyft websites:
https://www.uber.com
https://www.lyft.com
I may not have the popular opinion here, but I thought it was really smart of Uber to continue their services during this time. I thought that it showed a responsibility to their customers who absolutely needed to travel within that hour that no other services were available. It's unfortunate that people didn't really view it this way, though I suppose it could be due to the fact that the company tweeted about it, like you said. Perhaps if they hadn't, people wouldn't really have taken notice and accused them of just trying to make a profit?
ReplyDelete