Back to Article:

Labatt backs away from Magnotta photo debacle

Comment

Have your say on this topic! Comments that are thought to be disrespectful or offensive may be removed by our Marketing Magazine admins. Thanks! * These fields are required. There is a character limit on comments.
Comments

Steve

Next thing you know, Labatts will be asking every newspaper in the country to remove photos of car wrecks where the driver was drunk. Drink and cannibalize responsibly, kids.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 8:48 pm | Reply

Christo

Another instance of a brand thinking that people actually care about shit that is totally inconsequential. These brand managers are like a bunch of girls sitting around worrying that people think their ass looks big. No body cares… until you draw attention to it.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 5:26 pm | Reply

Laurence Bernstein

It’s the Streisand Effect writ large. Perhaps Labatts should have been at the CMA Summit where one of the speakers described this phenomenon and advised how to avoid it!

Wednesday, June 06 @ 5:02 pm | Reply

Glen

Haha! This is exactly what I was thinking. Labatt was the one to draw all the attention to it. Now if their brand suffers it’s their own stupidity that blew up this “story”. As mentioned, if Labatt hadn’t had brought it nearly nobody would’ve noticed.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 4:31 pm | Reply

Nicholastheentertainer

“Not to be a dick but doing an anti-violence play makes labatt look like another douchey corporation that tacks onto charities to make a buck. Let’s not be naive. Companies don’t do this because they honestly want to support charity (remember, this is a publicly traded company). They do it for the branding. So someone will try the beer to support the charity and switch or like the brand positioning enough to support the product.

Don’t even get me started on all the ‘pink’ charities that are leeching off of breast cancer…”

In response to this, it’s my opinion that who cares why these corporations do it, at least the charity benefits. I for one am all for breast cancer research collecting as many dollars as it can from any source it can.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 3:43 pm | Reply

imafkr

Glad to see that the streisand effect is alive and well.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 3:43 pm | Reply

PR101

Thank you Labatt on a textbook demonstration of how not to protect your brand.
Labatt should’ve said “hey it sucks that this jerk is holding a Blue. This upsets us. So for every person who donates to anti-violence charity X, we will match it.” Then they would have looked like heroes. But instead, they’ve made themselves look like clowns. But the best plan would’ve been to do nothing.

Wednesday, June 06 @ 12:10 pm | Reply

bluietheimpala

Agree with your last point 1,000,000%, PR 101 would be doing nothing. You must be a pro.

This is the age of the internet. Fires start way too easily to pro-actively address this in any way. It will come across as knee jerk and pandering.

Trolls will troll but most consumers wouldn’t even give a shit. Most would barely even notice. Remember, it was Labatt that raised the issue with the Gaz. Not a consumer. It was some vanilla pencil dick PR person freaking out and justifying his/her job in the organization.

Not to be a dick but doing an anti-violence play makes labatt look like another douchey corporation that tacks onto charities to make a buck. Let’s not be naive. Companies don’t do this because they honestly want to support charity (remember, this is a publicly traded company). They do it for the branding. So someone will try the beer to support the charity and switch or like the brand positioning enough to support the product.

Don’t even get me started on all the ‘pink’ charities that are leeching off of breast cancer…

Labatt. Epic fail. But I don’t drink your garbage fizzy piss anyway!
Go Creemore and Wellington!Yum! Woot! Woot!

Wednesday, June 06 @ 2:38 pm

Magazine Daily RSS