Now that the dust has cleared on this Monster Energy Drink vs Vermonster beer debacle, I’d like to share some thoughts about the matter. I speak as someone who wrote their Master’s Thesis (along with two partners) on the psychology of consumer boycotts. Our thesis examined not only why people choose to boycott but how they spread word of their involvement through channels like blogs and social media. In the interest of brevity I will only speak about a few of these issues.
People who boycott Monster see the energy drink company as an example of corporate greed and corporate out-of-touchness (a scientific term, I assure you). But because these boycotters cannot literally boycott corporate greed, they reach for Monster. They channel these much deeper feelings into their campaign against Monster.
It was a heated fight, but I am happy to report that both sides have won. Rock Art Brewery, who brews Vermonster, wins the right to use the name of their product, receives an incalculable amount of press coverage, and gives its consumers the impression that their support of the product is somehow an extension of their disapproval of corporate America. Not that people who live in Vermont need any more reason to distrust corporate America, but it can’t hurt.
Monster Energy Drink didn’t lose this fight, however. At least one large-scale study (Ettenson & Klein) has shown that people who boycott a product do not initially let their behavior influence their evaluation of the quality of the product. In other words, no one has stopped literally liking the taste of Monster due to this situation. There are of course people who don’t like the taste of energy drinks, but that one is moot because there are also people who don’t like the taste of beer.
But it’s not all rosy for Monster, either. The energy drink category is one with a tremendous number of competitors and consumers can easily switch brands. This is in part what makes boycotting Monster so simple: consumers do not have to give up anything! They just begin drinking another type of energy drink and feel better about themselves. Some may argue (Funches et al) that these consumers feel empowered because they avoid Monster and because they can teach Monster a lesson by boycotting. There is no risk incurred when boycotting because there is no way for Monster to retaliate against the boycotters.
The previous study (E&K) demonstrates that people who remain angry with a brand (in this case, for a period of one year) begin to let their dissatisfaction affect their impressions of the product. This means that someone who is angry with Monster (and enjoys the product) can actually convince themselves that they dislike the taste of Monster. I predict that this will happen for a small number of participants, but otherwise believe that this issue will soon pass.
In our Thesis research, we found (and studies show, Yuksel & Mryteza) that the most effective way for companies to live down a crisis like this is to shower the target market with unrelated positive information about the company. Maybe Monster builds homes in low-income communities, or donates lots of money to cancer research or education. These are the types of things that, when publicized, make consumers say, “You know what? Maybe they ARE a good company after all.” But remember that consumers are smart and they can smell BS a mile away. There’s no guarantee that this will work, so their best bet is probably to lay low for a while.
Vermonster has the PR opportunity of a lifetime here. I wish them all the best and hope they can channel this publicity into lasting business for their brand. With that said, I’ll have a Sweetwater IPA tonight. Support your local brewery!
Thesis sources cited in this piece:
Ettenson, R, Klein, J.G. (2005), ‘The fallout from French nuclear testing in the South Pacific: A longitudinal study of consumer boycotts’, International Marketing Review
Funches, V, Markley, M, Davis, L. (2009), ‘Reprisal, retribution and requital: Investigating consumer retaliation’, Journal of Business Research
Yuksel, U, Mryteza, V. (2009), ‘An evaluation of strategic responses to consumer boycotts’, Journal of Business Research
Tagged as:
beer,
boycotts,
social media
