When Target decided to pull some of its Pride Month merchandise following public backlash, the move drew national attention and raised questions about how consumers perceive brands that walk back their support for social causes.
In new research, a DePaul University professor examines this impact of retraction on public perception. This Q&A with Jennifer Tatara,
(Headshot of Jennifer Tatara) assistant professor of marketing in the Driehaus College of Business, explores her academic research into how consumers react when brands retract their support for a cause after facing controversy.
Q: What sparked your research into brand retractions?
My research team, which includes Dr. Tyler Milfeld from Villanova, Dr. Courtney Peters from Samford, and myself, noticed a pattern of brands publicly taking a stand and then walking it back after receiving online backlash. We wanted to understand how that impacts consumer perception, particularly in terms of brand attitudes and perceived hypocrisy.
Q: What was the research based on?
We drew from political advertising literature, especially studies on political "flip-flopping." That body of research shows that flip-flopping is generally a lose-lose strategy, and we wanted to see if the same principle applied in the context of brand activism.
Q: What types of brand responses did you examine?
Retraction is when a company apologizes and reverses its original stance or action. Responsibility means acknowledging the controversy without withdrawing support. Reaffirmation is doubling down on the original stance. No response is simply not addressing the controversy at all.
Q: What were your key findings?
- Retraction is the worst option. It leads to higher perceptions of hypocrisy and does not help win over opponents of the stance. In fact, it often alienates both sides.
- No response is similar to reaffirmation. Surprisingly, remaining silent performs similarly to doubling down. It avoids escalating the controversy while still signaling implicit support.
- Justifying a retraction can help. If the reason for pulling back is legitimate, such as concerns for employee safety, people are less likely to perceive the brand as hypocritical. However, this does not necessarily restore goodwill.
Q: What's your advice to companies facing online criticism for activism?
Social media makes it far too easy for companies to respond impulsively. This often leads to rushed and poorly considered apologies or retractions. Brands need to adopt a more strategic and research-informed approach instead of reacting out of panic.
Q: What's next for this research?
We see a lot of opportunity to explore additional factors, such as response timing, backlash intensity, and long-term effects on brand perception. We are also open to collaborations, especially involving data visualization and engagement through centers like The SPARK Center and the BETA Hub
You can read more about the study in the Journal of Advertising Research.