YouGov-品牌的社交聲音（英文版）

1、ContentsGB ProfileThose who believe brands are exploiting issuesIn Britain, the 17% who believe that brands are exploiting certain issues share similar demographics to their counterparts in the US and have a skew towards being male and older.This group over-indexes on the following issues:I think ne

2、wspapers? S tryingtaa hat曲encoa%vs tnat repuse emojis in thei?鉞87ectives vs 48%comunicationsnat rep,“ill alw; ; beat idea5交10/ Overall you getvs 7亦4恁前施麗腌gvs 15% WPfttjfMaptop nat rep or tabletThe below table is ranked to show the biggest differences between this group and the general population.In w

3、hich, if any, of the following areas is it acceptable for a brand to communicate their point of view in marketing materials or othercommunications? gb nat叩communications? gb nat叩 Those who definitely agree that brands are exploiting issues (GB)Difference1110101010Beware of the boycotters?For some co

4、nsumers, a brand having a strong view on a subject will make them more likely to buy that brand, but for others this may have the opposite effect. Nike recently experienced this risk versus reward scenario when the brand chose Colin Kaepernick - a former NFL quarterback widely known for kneeling dur

5、ing Americas national anthem in protest of racial injustice - as the face of its 30th anniversary “Just Do It“ ad campaign.The US and GB are quite even when it comes to saying theyv didnt likearoundv didnt likearoundressed a view thegree that they will buy方幗啟由岫命詡鳥aasliain出PPSRJGi硼i03Wesrtswear manuf

6、acturer may have come to the same conclusion and YouGovs own data shows that its recent customers in the tend to be more receptive to brands taking a stand on social issues.7 SI 0/-I like when companies have a moral messagevs 68% nat repx QQZ Companies and their brands should O O /O be able to expre

7、ss how they feel onvs 61% nat rep a topicx co/ e brands that are O D X) willing to get involved vs 48% nat rep 訪 societal issuesWhats more, fewer Brits agree that advertising influences what they buy, hinting at a belief that they are, in general, less susceptible to outside influence from brands co

8、mpared to Americans.US fit GB purchasingattitudes Definitely disagree Tend to disagree | Neither agree nor disagreeTend to agree Definitely agreeIf a brand I like expresses a view I agree with in ads, Pm more likely to buy It5%19%12%19%7%21%20%9%5%26%15%18%5%26%15%18%GBIf a brand holds a view I disa

9、gree with, I will stop buying from them8%26%15%14%Advertising helps me choose what I buyus12%28%14%8%GB16%35%13%31%5%The framework below shows that consumers can be split into different groups depending on whether they will increase their level of spending with a brand or refuse to buy from a brand

10、if they express a certain point of view. It shows the views of the general public but can be recreated for individual brand audiences.The largest group of US consumers are the 39% (see Reactive group below) who could be swayed by a brands actions either way. This group can offer great reward but can

11、 also become a risk if they dont like the cause a brand supports.Around a quarter (24%) of the population will buy more if they like what a brand says - but are unlikely to boycott a brand even if it voices an opinion they disagree with (see Loyal group below).Another quarter (25%) say they dont min

12、d either way (see Indifferent group below) and are unlikely to change their purchase behaviour because of a brands outlook. Lastly, 12% are not only prone to boycotting a brand over a disagreeable view, they also report that they wont buy more even if their views align with a brand (see No Upside gr

13、oup below).Risk vs Reward USIf a brand holds a view I disagree with, I will stop buying from themAgreeAgreeNeitherDisagreeIf a brand I like expresses a viewI agree with in ads, Pm more likely to buy itAgreeNeitherReactive39%No Upside12%Loyal24%IndifferentDisagreeUsing the same framework to classify

14、GB consumers, the data reveals that brands that hold a view will have less to gain and, potentially, more to lose among a British audience than an American one.In Britain, there is a smaller group of people (20%) who would buy more from a brand if it expressed a view the consumer agreed with (see Lo

15、yal group below), Along with the 24% in the US who believe the same, this type of consumer serves as a mouth-watering group for brands that dont want to worry overwhether theirviews will negatively affect purchase behaviour.On the other hand, close to a third (31%) of British consumers embody the cl

16、assic risk versus reward argument (see Reactive1 group below), Consumers in this group can be swayed either way but aligning with a disagreeable issue could potentially impact a brands bottom line.Another third (31%) of GB consumers say that a brands view - whether agreeable or disagreeable with the

17、ir own - will likely not affect their purchase decision (see Indifferent1 group below). This could indicate that perhaps the British are less passionate about issues or that they dont like to admit to being swayed by external influences.And markedly, slightly more in Britain (17%) than the US (12%)

18、belong to the high risk, low reward group (see No Upside，group below). Brands here have little to win by voicing their opinions since consumers in this group are likely to boycott and even if a brands views align with their own, will not be more likely to buy from the brand.Risk vs Reward GBIf a bra

19、nd holds a view I disagree with, I will stop buying from themDisagreeDisagreeIf a brand I like expresses a view AgreeI agree with in ads, Im more Neither likely to buy itDisagreeAgreeNeitherLoyalNo Upside17%20%Indifferent(%) Very important?17%Dont take life too seriously18%Howshould brands communica

20、te?If brands do get involved in a social issue, it seems clear that consumers believe it should be an issue that fits the brands image. Above all, people in both the US and Britain want brands to be honest, trustworthy, and genuine. Being clever, serious and reflecting their customers own values is

21、not seen as important. It seems that people would prefer brands stay true to themselves rather thanjumping on a bandwagon.What matters to consumers in brand messaging?In general, howimportant or not is it, that the brandsyou like act and communicate in the following ways?US nat repGB nat repLush and

22、#SpyCopsWas the campaign in line with the brands uactivist spirit” or an example ofissue exploitation?In the summer of 2018, cosmetics retailer Lush launched a UK-based campaign calling attention to the activities of some undercover police officers who entered into intimate relationships with those

23、they were investigating, which they labelled as #SpyCops.While some were confused about why the brand was criticising a niche aspect of policing, Lush believed it was in line with its “activist spirit and agenda”. However, after a media furore, the brand pulled marketing material around the campaign

24、.UK nat repApr 2018May 2018Jun 2018Jul 2018Aug 2018Sept 2018Net Sentiment Women 18-39YouGovs own data shows a significant decline in Net Sentiment among both the general public and Lushs core audience - women aged 18 to 39, The data reflects the largely negative noise around the campaign during the

25、span of the #SpyCops incident.However, a look at a lower funnel metric shows little fall-out for the brand as a result of all the negative attention. Unlike its sentiment score, Lushs Purchase Intent (an indicator of future potential revenue) did not see a decline among either the general population

26、 or the brands core audience.UK nat repPurchase Intent (%) women 18-39Even when comparing the opinions of people who buy luxury brands to those who prefer budget brands there are very few differences between GB and US consumers.Even when comparing the opinions of people who buy luxury brands to thos

27、e who prefer budget brands there are very few differences between GB and US consumers.Are there differences for luxury brands? (%)Very ImportantIn general, howimportant or not is it, that the brandsyou like act and communicate in the following ways?US luxury brand consumersUS non-luxury consumersAre

28、 trustworthyAre honestAre genuineConsistent in what they say and what they doAct with authenticityShow they have principlesUnderstand the everyday challenges people faceShow they careStand for somethingAre clever/ witty/ show they have a sense of humour54%47%35%lect your personal views27%t take life

29、 too seriouslyGB luxury brand consumersGB non-luxuryconsumers48%Are trustworthyAre honestAre genuineConsistent in what they say and what they do52%34%Act with authenticity42%23%Show they have principles40%22% Understand the everyday challenges people face33%29%Show they care42%16%Stand for something

30、23%14% Are clever/ witty/ show they have a sense of humour 6%19%Reflect your personal views10%7%Dont take life too seriously14%Who wants brand purpose?US ProfileWho wants brand purpose?In the US, just under one in five people (18%) strongly believe that brands should both reflect their personal view

31、s and stand for something. For this group, a sense of brand purpose seems to be essential.Attitudes70%vs 46% nat rep “Ithinkitis important to stay looking young”47%vs 23% nat rep“I usually know all the new and emerging music artists”68%vs 45% nat rep “I prefer to watch TV shows live”45%vs 21% nat re

32、p “I enjoy ads on TV50%vs 29% nat rep“I like to stand out”42%vs 20% nat rep“I spend a lot on clothes”Demographics39%vs 28% nat repLow income - under 30k family income44%26%vs 34% nat rep vs 12% natrepMillennial BlackThey over-index in having a positive view of the following brands22%vs 14% nat repHi

33、spanicWhat the world thinksThose who want brand purposeAmerican Airlines54%29%Childrens Motrin42%20%NBA54%25%BET35%14%Bank of America 140%23%Citi Trends17%4%Made a pledqe to be Carbon neutral by 2020 in 2016.19Looking back at our “risk vs rewardn framework, six in ten (59%) people in this group fall

34、 into the light purple Reactive group (high risk of boycotting but also a high potential to buy more), compared to just four in ten (39%) of the US population as whole. This indicates that expressing the “right“ view is very important.The issues that this group are most likely to think are acceptabl

35、e for brands to comment on are human rights, education and animal cruelty.Looking back at our “risk vs rewardn framework, six in ten (59%) people in this group fall into the light purple Reactive group (high risk of boycotting but also a high potential to buy more), compared to just four in ten (39%

36、) of the US population as whole. This indicates that expressing the “right“ view is very important.The issues that this group are most likely to think are acceptable for brands to comment on are human rights, education and animal cruelty.59%vs 39% nat repReactiveIn which, if any, of the following ar

37、eas is it acceptable for a brand to communicate their point of viewin marketing materials or other communications?49%vs 38% nat repHuman rights40%vs 34% nat repEducation37%vs 35% nat repAnimalcrueltyThose who wantCausebrand purposeUS NatrepImmigration35%20%Environmental issues35%33%Local issues29%22

38、%Aligning w/specific charities26%25%Taxation26%15%The President/Presidency24%15%International issues23%15%Drug legislation22%16%LGBT+ rights22%18%Religious issues21%13%Those who wantUS NatCausebrand purposerepSupporting a political party19%12%Gender issues(metoo, feminism)19%17%Aligning w/ specific

39、geographicregions16%13%Capital punishment15%11%Aligning w/ a specific sports team14%18%Regional autonomy13%8%Brexit9%7%None of these7%16%20What the world thinksIntroductionMore and more, brands are expressing opinions on social and political issues, supporting causes, and presenting themselves as in

40、fluencers on wider topics in society.But to what extent do consumers believe that brands should associate themselves with certain issues? This paper uses YouGov data to compare the point of view of consumers from the US and Britain.It explores whether they think its appropriate for brands to comment

41、 on social issues and to what extent it depends on the industry.It also looks at whether the reward outweighs the risk of losing customers when it comes to brands nailing their colours to a particular issues mast.More than half (52%) of people in Britain think that brands should be able to express h

42、ow they feel on a certain topic, compared with 61 % of those from the US.Whafs more, just under half (48%) of Americans say they like brands that are willing to get involved in social issues and 42% of Brits say the same.Almost six in ten (59%) people in both countries dont think brands should expre

43、ss views on social or politicalissues, but, as weTlsee later, this depends on the industry and the issue. This indicates that its up to the brand themselves to weigh up the risk versus the reward and understand what causes will resonate with their own audience and what will put them off.The data sho

44、ws that GB and US consumers are broadly similar when it comes to the bigger picture. Definitely agree Tend to agree Neither agree nordisagreeTend to disagreeDefinitely disagreeTwo years prior to Nike choosing Kaepernick as the face of its politically-tinged “Just Do It” campaign (see page 12), anoth

45、er sportswear brand became involved in political issues.In November 2016, New Balances VP of Public Affairs sent out a tweet saying that with President Trump elected, things are going to move in the right direction, Shortly after, some customers started burning the brands shoes.New Balances positive

46、 Buzz drops among liberals after political tweetIf youve heard anything about the brand in the past two weeks - through news, advertising, or word of mouth - was it positive or negative? (Buzz scores range from -100 to +100) Total US Political Ideology: Liberal Political Ideology: Conservative Total

47、 US Political Ideology: Liberal Political Ideology: ConservativeAmong people who would consider buying from New BalanceCurrently, 29% of people who would consider buying from New Balance view themselves as liberal. Slightly more lean conservative (33%) but a look at how Buzz was affected by the twee

48、t shows only a modest uptick among conservatives. The effect was particularly pronounced among liberals whose perception peaked at +13 before the tweet and after, fell by nine points.Given the split in political ideology among people who consider the brand, New Balance must weigh whether damage to i

49、ts liberal audience is worth such a slight increase in Buzz among a conservative audience.21What the world thinks59%vs 31% nat repReactive40%vs 31% nat repMillennials20%vs 12% nat repLive in north west47%vs 31% nat repHuman rights45%vs 37% nat repAnimalcruelty42%vs 38% nat repEnvironmental issuesGB

50、ProfileWho wants brand purpose?As with their US counterparts, a large number (59% vs 31% nat rep) belong to the more reactive group who say they would boycott or buy more from a brand depending on their stance. They also have similar views about what topics are acceptable for brands to have opinions

51、 about.In Britain, this group of people who strongly believe that brands should both reflect their personal views and stand for something is much smaller (10% compared with 18% in the US).34%vs 17% nat repSocial grade: C2In which, if any, of the following areas is it acceptable for a brand to commun

52、icate their point of view in marketing materials or other communications?Those who wantThose who wantCausebrand purposeNat repCausebrand purposeNat repEducation32%23%Drug legislation17%14%Aligning w/specific charities27%27%Aligning w/ specific sports team15%16%LGBT+ rights25%18%Brexit15%17%Local iss

53、ues25%23%Capital punishment15%10%Gender issues(metoo, feminism)23%15%Taxation13%14%International issues20%15%The Monarchy12%10%Immigration18%15%Supporting a politcal party10%8%Aligning w/ specific geographicRegional autonomy9%8%regions18%15%Religious issues8%8%None of these4%14%ConclusionBrands invo

54、lvement in social issues is certainly something that marketers and managers should be interested in. Around eight in ten people in the US and Britain believe it is important to some extent that brands have a voice in these areas.Those who believe brands should have a voice in this area are split abo

55、ut why they should get involved and there is a clear hierarchy when it comes to the industries that people think should become involved in social issues.However, getting involved is not without its pitfalls. There are sizeable groups in each country that believe that in expressing a view brands are

56、exploiting issues. Across both countries, these groups share certain characteristics and opinions.Brands involvement in social issues is certainly something that marketers and managers should be interested in. Around eight in ten people in the US and Britain believe it is important to some extent th

57、at brands have a voice in these areas.Those who believe brands should have a voice in this area are split about why they should get involved and there is a clear hierarchy when it comes to the industries that people think should become involved in social issues.However, getting involved is not witho

58、ut its pitfalls. There are sizeable groups in each country that believe that in expressing a view brands are exploiting issues. Across both countries, these groups share certain characteristics and opinions.elieve to some extent that it isimportant for brands to have aclear/transparent point of view

59、 onthe wider issues in society.Outside of brand equity and related issues, there is the simple question of whether a brand pinning its colours to the mast could impact its bottom line. Our segmented data shows that this is more likely to be the case in the US.All of these findings point to the impor

60、tance of a brand knowing its target audience and what is right for them. Within this, there is a broader point. Consumers (as a whole) are far more likely to want brands to communicate honestly, be trustworthy and act genuinely more than they want them to stand for something.This suggests that brand