Trump, Morality, and Business Taking the High Road

Who would have thought that taking a stand against neo-nazis would spark an outcry in 2017 America? But it did. After repeated refusal from Donald Trump to outright condemn the beliefs of the White Nationalists (aka Nazis) who gathered in Charlottesville, Virginia, numerous CEOs who belonged to Trump’s Strategic and Policy Forum decided to disband the group.

In a statement from Jamie Dimon, Chase Chairman and CEO, he explained how Trump’s reaction to events do not fit with his values or the values of his company. As he stated, “There is no room for equivocation here: the evil on display by these perpetrators of hate should be condemned and has no place in a country that draws strength from our diversity and humanity.”

As someone working for an organization that has worked closely with Chase for more than a decade, I say, “Hell yes.” But it begs the question, why did so many companies and CEOs respond to Trumps call in the first place? CEOs like Elon Musk (who would eventually decide to stop advising the President after Trump backed out of the Paris Climate Accord) said he joined the Presidential Advisory Forum “…to provide feedback on issues that I think are important for our country and the world.” Being the voice of reason became a driving force for many of those who joined the effort.

The cynic might say it was just “good business?” After all, Trump won half the country’s vote. You don’t want to turn your back on half of America if you own a business. But it would seem now that “good business” is taking a backseat to “good.”

Only time will tell if this will affect their businesses. However, if one were to listen to the “loud” voices on social media, you would think it would be the latter. After 30 minutes of Chase posting Jamie Dimon’s statement on Facebook, 80% of comments were negative against Jamie Dimon and Chase.  That’s right, 80%. But the “like” response tells a different story from the comments. 95% of the clicks were likes and loves. Only 5% hate.

This is the world that CEOs are facing today. Ambiguity is the norm. And what should be a simple decision has become more complicated for business owners. Some businesses, like Nordstrom, who took hardline stances against the Alt Right from the beginning, saw increases in sales. However, sites like grabyourwallet.org who list companies who they believe you should boycott due to their anti-trump views are surprisingly popular. In February of 2017, this site had more than one million visitors.

So, you would think what Jamie Dimon and other business leaders did today would be easy. It was not. It was brave. It was just. And it could very well affect their business in the near future. The great thing is that ultimately they didn’t care. The hope is that, in the long run, choosing to support all people will lead to more customers choosing to do business with you.

 

 

Advertisements

84 Lumber and the Power of Brands

By now, everyone is discussing the 84 Lumber ad that ran during last night’s Big Game. For the few unfamiliar with the ad, a Mexican mother and daughter, who appear to be on their way to the United States, survive the perils of migrating from their home and ultimately come across a depiction of an imposing border wall, reminiscent of the one Trump has discussed since he burst, again, into the limelight so many months ago.

Fox rejected the spot not because of violence or nudity, but because it depicted a fairly accurate visual of what Trump’s wall would look like (if anything, it actually sanitizes the process). Not surprisingly, Fox appears to support the concept of the wall but censors any visual portrayal of it.

According to Rob Shapiro, the chief client officer at Brunner, the agency that worked with 84 Lumber to come up with the ad, “If everyone else is trying to avoid controversy, isn’t that the time when brands should take a stand for what they believe in?” I couldn’t agree more.

The reality is that brands have become political, perhaps they always were. That’s true because brands carry meaning. They are symbols that reflect not only a company’s vision, but the shared beliefs, practices, and values of the people who engage with them. Granted, some brands are innocuous, but those brand that really resonate take a position on more than their products, they take a position on their role in the world. They tell a story about who they are and where they fit into the world. And this is exactly what 84 Lumber, and indeed Brunner, chose to do. They chose to take a stand against the vagaries of The Wall and show in the cold, hard reality of what it implies. And in doing so they chose to articulate the simple truth that they will not willing be part of it.

Which, in turn, brings us back to what it was Fox took issue with. Was it the message of compassion at the end they were rejecting? Was it the entire spot and its portrayal of the journey? Was it the little girl with a flag she’d made along the way? Was it simply the door? My suspicion is that we’ll never know. Or, if is likely, Fox does provide an explanation, it will be a convoluted mix of half-truths and baseless accusations.

Regardless, this ad reflects precisely what good branding does. It brings a story to life, it drives interest, it provokes, and draws us in. And for that, both 84 Lumber and the agency should be extremely proud.