The recent advertising campaign by Pepsi and the attempt to brand a hockey cheer for team
This marketing campaign failed on many different levels, but its biggest failure was in its utilization of social media. Firstly the idea of a corporate inspired cheer that in essence brands Canadians was doomed to fail from the beginning. This is because the idea of a cheer is that it unites a nation, it provides a common chant that everyone in the nation is aware of and supports. The cheer is used to support Canadian hockey, and in essence represents the passion that is Canadian hockey. The idea that Pepsi, an American corporation, created a cheer that represents all of
While this has just been a rant of my own personal opinions on the matter, there is no doubt that Pepsi failed to successfully utilize social media. Social media by definition is participatory in nature, and is known for the creation of online communities that voice their opinions. After the official release of the Pepsi cheer “Eh Oh Canada Go” an enormous online community was created that called for a boycott of the cheer. This is seen in the over 60 Facebook groups opposing the cheer, especially seen in the group that has nearly 100,000 members. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=217528662837#!/group.php?v=wall&gid=217528662837. This number can be contrasted against the official Pepsi fan page on Facebook, which only has 130,000 fans. The Canadian citizens outrage reached further than alternative news outlets reaching mainstream newspapers such as the
There are also an abundant amount of YouTube videos on the internet criticising the cheer and its failure to engage actively with fans. This video is just one of the many that shares this opinion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc7gOoGeG3E.
While it was a noble attempt to utilize social media Pepsi missed the most important facet of social media; its interactive quality that allows citizens to express their own opinions. By not responding to these opinions Pepsi failed to actively contribute to the social media campaign they created, and as such has taken away from their credibility as a major marketing powerhouse. This is demonstrated by the fact that Pepsi has given up on promoting the cheer, while giving no public statement as to why the campaign ceases to exist. If Pepsi actively sought out to explain the reasoning behind the cheer it may not have ended up this way, but the failure to utilize citizen media is what lead to the downfall of this cheer, known to many as a disgrace to Canadian culture.
Until next time keep Employing Scrutinizing Responses
- The Ubiquitous Civilian
I agree, the idea of a corporation (let alone an American one) trying to market a national cheer in Canada is sickening. It's further proof of of the way national identity and sense of identity is becoming increasingly commercial and consumerist in today's era of globalization.
ReplyDeleteOn a lighter note, I think that the initial idea of bringing a nation together in attempt to collaborate together on a national hockey anthem is fabulous. To bring Canadians together through a common love of hockey to create an anthem to represent themselves has the possibility to bring remarkable results. However, the way Pepsi went about it is truly disheartening.
I hadn't really heard about the Pepsi cheer until I just read your blog. I checked it out on Twitter and ended up coming across this blog: http://dannedelko.com/social-networking/pepsi-cheer-social-media-done-wrong.html. He says that "doing Social Media badly is much worse than not doing Social Media at all". I agree with you both, in that if a company is just trying to get in on the whole Social Media, Twitter, Facebook, etc. sphere without respecting their guidelines and citizens' expectations, it will do them more harm than good. In this particular case, Pepsi was trying to be modern and cool, but just "fell flat". The conclusion in Mark Deuze's article says that news sites (or in this case, a marketing campaign) must be prepared for the consequences if they wish to change. Clearly Pepsi was not prepared for the consequences of their actions and did not know how to deal with citizens' opinions on Twitter and other sites.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very interesting blog, and I do agree a lot with what the author has to say. However I have to disagree with his point that "doing Social Media badly is much worse than not doing Social Media at all". Yes Pepsi did do a horrible job utilizing social media, but it is the fact they tried that is important here. This corporate involvement in citizen media marks an important transition within social media. Now rather than being seen as an alternative media source, social media is being seen as a part of popular culture, and is therefore being adopted by large corporations within the mainstream media. I feel that this shift has the potential to take away from the effectiveness of social media as a democratic tool that provides a voice of opposition.
ReplyDelete