Search

Purpose. In brand activism, a brand promotes contested socio-political causes to highlight its values. Brand activism also alienates those consumers who disagree with the cause, who might, consequently, target the brand with critical, negative, or even aggressive actions. This paper studies the triggers and strategies of consumers’ anti-brand actions given in response to brand activism. Design/methodology/approach. Qualitative content analysis and multiple correspondence analysis were used to study consumer responses directed at a chocolate brand’s campaign that advocated civilized online conversions and opposed hate speech, a politically heated topic. 1,615 messages were collected from social media platforms. Findings. Field infringement, political accusations and questioned impact of the campaign triggered consumers to turn against the campaign. Strategies to undermine it included boycotting, discrediting the brand, and trapping. Trapping—creatively using technological affordances to create harm to the brand—was typically triggered by political associations. Originality. Political anti-brand actions are distinct from the previously identified functional and ethical anti-brand actions, and they are non-instrumental by nature. Practices that are native to social media are central to political anti-brand actions, and social media platforms contribute to how such disappointment is articulated and acted upon. Research limitations. Findings relate to the critical responses regarding one campaign only. Practical implications. By understanding the political discussion around the chosen cause, including the opponents’ typical triggers and strategies, brand activism can more credibly advocate for contested social causes and communicate brand values. Purpose In brand activism, a brand promotes contested sociopolitical causes to highlight its values. Brand activism also alienates those consumers who disagree with the cause, who might, consequently, target the brand with critical, negative or even aggressive actions. This paper aims to study the triggers and strategies of consumers' antibrand actions given in response to brand activism. Design/methodology/approach Qualitative content analysis and multiple correspondence analysis were used to study consumer responses directed at a chocolate brand's campaign that advocated civilized online conversions and opposed hate speech, a politically heated topic. In total, 1,615 messages were collected from social media platforms. Findings Field infringement, political accusations and questioned impact of the campaign triggered consumers to turn against the campaign. Strategies to undermine it included boycotting, discrediting the brand and trapping. Trapping - creatively using technological affordances to create harm to the brand - was typically triggered by political associations. Research limitations/implications Findings relate to the critical responses regarding one campaign only. Practical implications By understanding the political discussion around the chosen cause, including the opponents' typical triggers and strategies, brand activism can more credibly advocate for contested social causes and communicate brand values. Originality/value Political antibrand actions are distinct from the previously identified functional and ethical antibrand actions, and they are noninstrumental by nature. Practices that are native to social media are central to political antibrand actions, and social media platforms contribute to how such disappointment is articulated and acted upon.