#140: 7 Risks of Performative Brand Allyship #BLM
Good morning. I posted a new article yesterday:
Promises, Promises: 7 Risks of Performative Brand Allyship #BLM
Some excerpts below.
This week, as I watched the corporate responses roll in to #BlackLivesMatter and the protests erupting around the country and world... I found myself uncharacteristically.... quiet.
Hesitant to comment.
The truth is, I have a deep and very real fear of f*cking this up.
#BlackLivesMatter was created because black people are dying. Not because BIPOC lives matter more than others, but because they are treated as if they do not matter to begin with.
It's a movement to stop the very real, present and festering threat of white supremacy and end "violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes."
It builds on decades upon decades of struggle for equality that can often feel like deja vu as we slip back into complacency until the next horrific incident. #SayTheirName
It's a critical movement.
So, when I saw the now-familiar rush to issue brand statements, the letters "from our CEO," and the stark white-font-on-black-background social posts, my first instinct was cautious but real indignation.
How dare marketers enter such serious territory with impunity?
And further, how could any of us even begin to think that performative allyship will help?
But I do get it.
I am a marketer, and the conversations I've had all week are with those earnestly trying to do the right thing.
Race issues, like women’s issues, like LGBTQ issues, like issues of age, or disability, or the global pandemic, all affect us in real and uncomfortable ways that don’t fit neatly into an “audience insights” brief.
I don't have all the answers for my marketing colleagues. I'm very willing to watch and learn, to educate myself and be educated on what BLM needs from the world of business right now. I'm curious whether public statements of brand support actually help the cause. I'm open to the fact that they might. I maintain my inherent skepticism.
Performative allyship:
Is an empty promise - vague words like "condemn" or "stand with" without meaningful action.
Is opportunistic - supporting the cause only when trending, often without any history of demonstrated support before the movement was wildly popular.
Passes the blame - Quoting Holiday Philips:
"It refuses to acknowledge any personal responsibility for the systemic issues that provided the context for the relevant tragedy. Instead, it looks at a villain “out there” — a crooked police officer or a heartless conservative. It separates you (good) from them (bad)."
I recommend the full article by Holiday Philips on what performative allyship is.
Much has been written about brands who appear to be pandering to the protests:
Read Devika Daga's excellent piece highlighting hypocrisy within Uber, Away, Instacart, YouTube, Facebook, Amazon and more. She also highlights the thoughtful responses from Artnet, LEGO, YPFP.
Munroe Bergdorf called out L'Oreal Paris for its "speaking out is worth it" social media graphic, revealing the brand dropped her from a campaign in 2017 after the model spoke out about racism.
Ava DuVernay called out the NFL for issuing a statement of support for the movement while blacklisting Colin Kaepernick, while Martellus Bennett pointed out "none of them [white QBs] spoke up when it wasn't easy to speak up. Now they writing statements." AOC also called out the Washington Redskins.
The ACLU called out Amazon for its statement while selling facial recognition surveillance technology that "supercharges police abuse" and McDonalds for not protecting the health of its majority Black or non-Black people of color workforce.
Chris Gilliard argues in FastCompany that YouTube, Amazon, and Nextdoor are "Black Power-washing" while their business models exploit black people.
Nicole Sanchez lays out the many ways leadership teams are bungling this e.g. "having never listened to their head of DEI before, a company suddenly finds her 'indispensable...' as the only black women now involved in exec-level decisions. Shocker: she wasn't on the exec team to begin with and sure as hell doesn't get paid what they do."
Judd Legum highlights (THREAD) how Citi, Google, Amazon, and more have publicly embraced BLM while giving $$$ to members of Congress rated "F" by the NAACP in the last 2 years.
Activision Blizzard is being called out for double standards related to these protests and those happening in Hong Kong.
William Ottow called out the Metropolitan Opera for tweeting support for the protests while never having performed the work of a Black composer.
Mark Ritson screenshotted the predominantly white board of directors pages of companies next to their public statement of support for the BLM movement.
So what?
I believe performative allyship is dangerous, and carries real consequences:
It redefines the work down to hashtag activism
It exploits a human rights movement for corporate gain
It creates an illusion of progress
It further undermines the trust of already skeptical consumers
It perpetuates a cycle of hidden agendas through lobbying.
It drowns out the brands actually making a difference
It exposes our brands to enormous risk
Read the full piece for more - available here on LinkedIn, or here on my website.
Thank you for sharing it with your networks, or anyone that you believe needs to hear it.
This matters. Black lives matter.
Katie