The media outcry and public condemnation of Lowe’s pulling its ad placements from TLC’s upcoming show “All-American Muslim” may have put them in a precarious position. Cries of Lowe’s implied bigotry and prejudice could have been avoided or at least slightly muted if Lowe’s had handled it differently… but maybe this is actually the outcome they wanted.
What They Said
“Lowe’s has received a significant amount of communication on this program, from every perspective possible. Individuals and groups have strong political and societal views on this topic, and this program became a lightning rod for many of those views. As a result we did pull our advertising on this program.”
By seemingly trying to avoid conflict, they have fallen head first into it.
What They COULD Have Said
“After much research and consideration, we at Lowe’s feel that ad placement during TLC’s ‘All-American Muslims’ does not fit our ad strategy or speak to our core audience. In the interest of relevant content and cost-saving measures we have decided not to pursue ad placement during the show.”
Those in the business know that one of the main factors in television advertising is TARGET AUDIENCE. Ad placement on television can be very expensive, and if you’re not advertising to the right target audience, you won’t see any return on your investment.
That is why you see beer commercials during football games, but not during the Charlie Brown Christmas Special. In-depth analysis has probably shown that people who drink beer watch football, and kids that watch Charlie Brown, do not drink beer.
That’s why you see advertisements for life insurance and Poli-grip in the morning and not at midnight. Research has probably shown that elderly people are watching TV in the morning and not late at night, and that they have a potential interest in life insurance and denture adhesive.
It would’ve been an easy out with way less scandalous results.
Lowe’s probably should have been able to predict the backlash from how they announced they would be pulling ads from the show. And maybe they did? There’s always the old adage that there’s no such thing as bad press.
In November 2011, Lowe’s that increased costs and restructuring decreased its net income by 44% and according to the New York Times “Retailers like Lowe’s are facing tough times as consumers continue to hold back on large-scale home improvement projects. Lowe’s has started closing stores and cutting costs to offset weak demand.”
If there’s no such thing as bad press, they’ve done a wonderful job getting in the spotlight and infiltrating people’s minds. Is it possible that what they said was carefully orchestrated to bring them attention?
Plus, after Lowe’s made their announcement, Kayak followed suit. After the backlash Lowe’s was getting, what company would follow them into the fire if there wasn’t an ulterior motive? Perhaps they weren’t following them into the fire, but instead jumping on their media spotlight bandwagon.
Yet, weeks later, the media firestorm has calmed to barely a sizzle. What’s your take on Lowe’s ad scandal. Should they have stuck it out, revised how they announced they’re ad pulling? Was the backlash intentional? Leave us a comment with your thoughts!
Leave a Reply