Is it better to have people angry with you than not talking about you at all
PepsiCo just underwent an onslaught of public dissent (#pepsifail) and debate over the “Before You Score” iPhone application for its AMP energy drink. Here’s the commercial that shows the application in action.
There’s been endless debate on the subject. Read Mashable’s article on the issue and then their follow up piece on AMP’s apology. Here’s my summary of what PepsiCo/AMP did right and what they did wrong.
What did the PepsiCo/AMP brand do right?
- They created a controversial application that got people talking.
- They created an application specifically targeted towards their demographic, young men.
- When the online anger took off, they immediately responded and apologized if some saw it in bad taste, but that their intention was humorous. Here’s the tweeted apology.
- They invited feedback.
- They saw that the discussion was trending on the hashtag #pepsifail and tagged their tweeted apology with it. This first and foremost guaranteed that their apology would be seen, but they also accepted the community decision that this was how this story would be classified.
What did the PepsiCo/AMP brand do wrong?
- The application’s content was not unique, it just played off of tired stereotypes.
- It could have been funnier. AXE’s commercials and content are funnier because they create a completely over-the-top male fantasy. And AXE’s content really pokes fun at the male fantasy. This one didn’t really poke fun at male behavior, even though that was AMP’s tweeted intention. Rather it stereotyped women in an often unflattering way.
Having done standup comedy myself I know that offending people is an unfortunate part of the business. It’s hard to get away from it. There are very few comedians that don’t offend anyone. Even Jay Leno who is about as squeaky clean as you get actually has a mean streak as he makes fun of people for their ignorance in his “Jaywalking” segments.
Ultimately, was this application, the community response, and AMP’s response successful? I think it was successful for the following reasons.
- I didn’t even know what AMP energy drink was before this happened. I’ve now “discovered” AMP.
- Nobody died and they had an open and honest dialogue with the community about the application, and their intention. They didn’t cave to pressure and pull the application down (the usual response). Rather they engaged in a very open conversation. We’ve seen true social media failures where the communications department runs in around in circles trying to hide their mistake. Those epic failures live on as what not to do in social media. This will not live as one of those examples. Instead this case will live on as an example of how to spin a mistake into a win in social media.
- They got TRAFFIC! As of Friday last week all of 150 people had download the program. Today, Wednesday, they have over 17,000 downloads, according to an AMP spokesperson I talked with. UPDATE: I talked with the AMP spokesman again, and it turns out those numbers are very dated. As of Thursday morning they had nearly 77,000 downloads of which 75,854 came AFTER the story broke on Mashable. They’re now the #2 free entertainment application, and #12 overall in free applications.
What do you think? Can you argue with success like that? Do you think the PepsiCo/AMP iPhone application was a success or a failure?
4 responses so far
Follow Us!
I think they new it would cause this type of reaction and the response was pre planned. Fair play. Like you say people are now talking and are aware of AMP energy drink! Simples.
Failure. It has completely turned me off to the brand. I will not only stop drinking Pepsi. But I will stop consuming any other products produced by the corporation. The company must make amends. Pull down the program. Put in place better internal controls to stick with the company’s values.
I used to consume around $50/month on Pepsi’s drinks alone. They will lose my business and the business of many of the people I know.
Its terrible to see them promoting the underlying systems of thought that lead to things such as date rape, gang rape, rape, sexual assault, battering and many other forms of abuse which stem from women being viewed as objects rather than equals. There is truly no empathy from the company.
Those in favor, “all in good fun” should do a little research into how these type of destructive messages conglomerate and directly influence hundreds of thousands of boys and reinforce that women objects to be toyed with. Total lack of compassion. Total lack of empathy. Our society is training these traits out of young men when unfortunately these are some of the most critical traits for ameliorating the problems in this world.
[...] To read another good company response to negative criticism, read my piece on the Intertainment Media blog, “Is it better to have people angry with you than not talking about you at all?” [...]
I think you can’t please everyone. And you shouldn’t try.
My business partner was sitting in a panel recently and one of the panelist said that negative sentiment helps with sale…strange but true. All depends who the negative sentiment comes from. If it’s from your target market …problem; but if it’s from outside your target market, it’s ok. Negative sentiment/review make something more real, it may highlight value points that are missing in the service/products but if the target audience for the product/service doesn’t care about them, thats fine too.
In this time of social everything, the worst is if nobody talks about you. It means you fail. A reasonable dose of negativism from outside of the audience or outside of the value prop isn’t that bad afterall.