Sometimes it seems like an easy way to generate some free publicity: Jump on a cause you know the media will support.
Usually the formula is pretty simple: Donate money after a natural disaster. Do something for the military. Help a homeless family.
Those are always sure-fire ways to get positive exposure for your company.
In fact, one definition for Public Relations we often use at Bottom Line is “Doing good and getting caught at it.” Over the years hundreds of our clients have been “caught” doing good by the news media.
Cracker Barrel seemed to think this was an opportune time to jump on the anti-”Duck Dynasty” bandwagon after the show’s patriarch’s views were deemed offensive to the gay community. The show is the highest rated on cable TV.
The company proudly announced it would no longer sell Duck Dynasty merchandise, and it would be removed from its shelves.
The crack Cracker Barrel team likely felt it had knocked a PR home run out of the park with the decision. One can only imagine the high-fives given out in the restaurant’s executive offices as major media outlets announced the company’s principled decision to take a stand on gay rights.
But just as quickly as the decision was made the company soon realized it had made a major financial mistake. Its core customers called for a boycott of the restaurant. Social media sites blasted the company for a stand it seemed against free speech.
“After you are done removing the selected products,” one customer wrote on the company’s Facebook wall, “go ahead and remove a bunch of tables and chairs……you won’t be needing them any more (sic).”
Faced with the overwhelming backlash, two days later Cracker Barrel was forced to admit it had made a mistake.
According to the New York Daily News, “Cracker Barrel then explained it wanted to avoid offending loyal customers — which is exactly what it did.”
“Dear Cracker Barrel Customer:
When we made the decision to remove and evaluate certain Duck Dynasty items, we offended many of our loyal customers. Our intent was to avoid offending, but that’s just what we’ve done.
You told us we made a mistake. And, you weren’t shy about it. You wrote, you called and you took to social media to express your thoughts and feelings. You flat out told us we were wrong.
We listened.
Today, we are putting all our Duck Dynasty products back in our stores.
And, we apologize for offending you.
We respect all individuals right to express their beliefs. We certainly did not mean to have anyone think different.
We sincerely hope you will continue to be part of our Cracker Barrel family.”
Under Armour seemed to have thought the issue through and decided to stay with the Duck Dynasty franchise.
The only thing worse than simply jumping on a cause for PR purposes is being forced to back down from it.
UPDATE (12/27): A&E has completely backtracked on the suspension of Phil Robertson from the show (LINK).
LESSONS TO BE LEARNED
Dear BLC: There is an important political lesson from the controversy over “Duck Dynasty.” Arguably, abortion rights and gay rights are the two most emotional issues in US society. But there are some clear trends in public opinion: First, the public has always been opposed to hate speech directed against gays, and in the past year or so has become a lot more supportive of gay marriage. But the public is strongly opposed to what I call “coercive acceptance”: Using political pressure to force people who have principled opposition to gay rights to accept the gay agenda. We saw that about a year ago with the massive turnout at Chick-Fil-E over threats by the mayors of NYC and Boston to retaliate against the restaurant chain because of its owner’s opposition to gay marriage: I even read that a number of gays pointedly shopped at Chick-Fil-E as a sign of their support for free speech. So, on “Duck Dynasty” the issue has become one of using political coercion to force acceptance-and the public has reacted in a massively negative way. The same is true on abortion: A majority of the public supports abortion under certain circumstances-but a huge majority of the public opposes political coercion against opponents of abortion: The public feels strongly that medical personnel opposed to abortion should not be coerced into performing abortions. As Americans, we should be proud of our country for opposing the use of political pressure to force acquiesence in political agendas: We are a nation that respects the right of conscience, which is why despite the fact we are a very patriotic people we allow certain religious groups to avoid being drafted to fight in our wars. The gay rights movement and the pro-choice movement are going to have to accept a basic fact: Whatever the merits of their causes, the public is not going to support the use of political force to silence those who dissent from their causes.
GLAAD SUDDENLY SILENT?
Notice how quiet GLAAD has been the last few days? That’s what happens after a bully gets punched in the nose.
NO ‘THOUGHT POLICE’
Dear Mr. Zack: Yes, GLAAD has been conspicuous by its absent in the past few days. Hopefully, all interest groups across the spectrum can learn a lesson from this unfortunate incident: The American people strongly respect rights of conscience, and they are not going to tolerate small-minded pressure groups on either left or right trying to force people to accept things that go deeply against their personal moral beliefs. My personal message to GLAAD: The gay rights agenda has made big advances in recent years, and most of these advances are for the good. But, and here is the catch: You can persuade society to give gays political rights, but you will run into insurmountable resistance if you try to not only get rights but insist that everyone stop criticizing your agenda. A democratic society is not going to accept a “Thought Police.” Take care!! Sincerely and Respectfully, Ernest Evans
A&E IS INSULT TO SOCIETY
I am never watching A@E again. Anyone associated with Phil Robertson of “Duck Dynasty” is a biggot in my opinion. Paula Deen was canned by the Food Network for the same type offensive comments and was fired! The Food Channel is to be commended (although I disagree with their decision) for standing by their original decison. A&E executives are a bunch of money-hungry biggots that opted to pad their own pockets rather than stand up to Robertson’s biggotry..an insult to thousands of United States citizens who are gay. I am digusted with your network for what an insult your are to human society and will never forgive you for turning “weenie” and rehiring Roberts… DISGUSTING!
George Puckett
Wichita, KS
ROBINSON SHOULD NOT BE ‘BLACKLISTED’
Dear Mr. Puckett: In the 1940′s and 1950′s Hollywood maintained a blacklist: Actors and screenwriters who had been members of the US Communist Party were not allowed to act in films or write scripts. Now, a lot of those blacklisted had done terrible things: Lillian Hellman, a screenwriter who was blacklisted, had repeatedly and passionately defended Stalin’s regime. But I feel strongly that they should not have been blacklisted simply because they had political ideas that I and most other Americans disagree with, The same is true for Phil Robertson today. A lot of the things he said in that interview I disagree with passionately. But he should not be subjected to a modern version of the “blacklist” because he has views that many people find offensive. George Orwell said it best when he said of the left in the 1930′s and 1940′s that: “The left wants to be anti-fascist without being anti-totalitarian.” Today’s liberal-left wants to be able to justify blacklisting people like Phil Robertson while still insisting that Lillian Hellman should not have been blacklisted. Sorry, that sort of position cannot be justified either morally or logically. Take care and God bless. Sincerely and Respectfully, Ernest Evans