Hallmark Channel Falls Victim to the 'Spotlight Effect'
Sean O'Meara, Founder & Director, Essential Content
Hallmark Channel's mishandling of what a minor gripe from a fringe special interest group is a classic case of a brand trying to placate a specific consumer demographic and alienating everyone all at once.
Hallmark was in a bind from the moment they saw the petitions from conservative group One Million Moms, who took issue with the broadcaster showing an advert from wedding planning brand Zola that showed two lesbians kissing. They were faced with a choice: Alienate those signing the petition and keep the adverts running, or remove the ads and alienate their many LGBT customers. They couldn’t decide which demographic to alienate and ironically, they’ve now angered pretty much everyone. It’s a common mistake that a lot of brands make.
This is always the problem when brands lack a plan for handling criticism, even if that criticism is particularly baseless, as this was. The brand hears criticism and immediately feels an impulse to react, without reviewing whether or not they are actually at fault.
Like a lot of brands facing criticism, Hallmark fell victim to the spotlight effect, a cognitive bias that makes us perceive the attention we are receiving to be greater than it is. Just over 30,000 people signed the One Million Moms petition to remove the ads. That’s a drop in the ocean compared to the bad press they received for removing it.
Another irony was how bad the apology actually was, given that Hallmark is literally in the business of saying things well. The first problem with the apology was that Hallmark gave themselves a glowing character reference, one of the many ways big organizations ruin their apologies that myself and psychologist Professor Sir Cary Cooper identified in our recent book The Apology Impulse: How the Business World Ruined Sorry and Why We Can’t Stop Saying It.
“We are an inclusive company and have a track record to prove it,'' said a spokesperson. Whether or not Hallmark views itself as an inclusive company is immaterial. And given that Hallmark is supposed to be apologizing for marginalizing gay and lesbian people, it is quite something that they feel comfortable making this grand claim now.
Hallmark have lost a lot of consumer trust already. The media coverage of the initial decision to withdraw Zola’s ads and the subsequent coverage of their U-turn and apology shows that the organization is not clear about how to communicate its values, or indeed what its values actually are.
They claim to be an inclusive company that celebrates diversity, but their decision to placate the groups behind the petition shows that their commitment to their stated values isn’t unshakable. This points to a lack of authenticity. It’s quite possible to have specific corporate values and stay true to them, even when certain segments of your customer base don’t agree with them.
When Ben & Jerry’s faced criticism for their partnership with controversial activist Linda Sarsour, they explained, instead of apologizing. The firm said in a Tweet, “We may not agree on everything, but the work that Linda has done to promote women’s rights is undeniably important and we are proud to join her in that effort.”
It could be a long way back for Hallmark. Although they’ve issued an apology, albeit one full of equivocation, they now to start from scratch in demonstrating they are genuinely committed to the values they claim to be.
Warren Buffet once said, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.” Hallmark’s reflexive response to criticism has shown that their social values only matter as long as they don’t cost them money.
Brands that have faced similar reputational issues in the past have resorted to the tried and tested “apology + donation” crisis management strategy. And we shouldn’t be surprised if we see Hallmark making a donation to an LGBT charity in the coming days or weeks. It was part of the response deployed by Papa John’s ($500 million to Bennett College in North Carolina) and popular YouTuber, PewdiePie ($50,000 to the Anti-Defamation League).
In their apology, Hallmark said, "We will continue to look for ways to be more inclusive and celebrate our differences.” That’s a start, but they do need to move quickly to prove that this isn’t mere lip-service to doing better. The Internet never forgets.
About the Author: Sean O'Meara is the founder and director of Essential Content, a communications and public relations consultancy. With more than 15 years of professional experience in corporate communications, O’Meara has worked with organizations including the BBC, Convergys (now Concentrix), and Co-op Bank. Connect with Sean O’Meara on LinkedIn and follow him on Twitter. O'Meara is co-author of The Apology Impulse: How the Business World Ruined Sorry and Why We Can’t Stop Saying It with Professor Sir Gary Cooper.
