LISTEN HERE:
Conservative shoppers have become dissatisfied with LEGO and are now boycotting the toy brand. Influencer Oli London, who has identified as transracial, gender-neutral, and transgender, reportedly claimed that the company released a line of “transgender building sets for kids” as part of its LGBTQI+ range.
According to the toy maker’s spokesperson, however, the influencer’s allegations are false and none of the sets he was referring to are for sale, as they are just an elaboration on a marketing campaign from last year featuring sets built by adult fans who happen to belong to the LGBTQIA+ community.
LEGO shared on its Pinterest board the collection of builds submitted by its LGBTQIA+ fans, which includes a wedding with two grooms and a garden with flowers in the colors of the transgender flag, among others. LEGO’s Pride campaign for this year was titled “Everyone is Awesome,” and it did, in fact, spark outrage on social media.
The company has been accused by some Twitter users of trying to sell its LGBTQ agenda to kids. One instance of such a claim, which has been tweeted by Oli London, shows LEGO’s “LGBTQIA Center” with LEGO Pride flags, and another post displays a rainbow castle. London even alleged that LEGO wants to subconsciously influence children with gender-identity ideology, which, unsurprisingly, stirred a lot of dissatisfaction towards the brand on social media.
LEGO, founded in Denmark back in 1932, has rebutted the influencer’s false claims, as well as lambasting the suggestion that the company is using its Pride agenda to influence gender ideology on children. However, it should be noted that other brands, such as Target, Bud Light, North Face, and Walmart, have faced similar backlash due to their pro-LGBTQ marketing campaigns. Target, for instance, recently promoted their “tuck-friendly” swimwear, while North Face came under fire over their “Summer of Pride” ad starring drag queen Pattie Gonia. Meanwhile, Walmart released a variety of Pride-themed clothes, accessories, and memorabilia in its “Pride & Joy” collection, which includes statements like “Some people are gay. Get over it.”
Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert has urged her followers to boycott any North Face product due to its pro-LGBTQ campaign, adding that North Face “wanted to get a taste of what conservatives did to Bud Light and Target.” At the same time, conservative Twitter users have lambasted LEGO for releasing its LGBTQ line of building sets. Consequently, some users have called for a boycott of LEGO’s products, just like in the case of Bud Light, Target, and Walmart.
However, some Twitter users have urged their fellow conservatives to temper their reactions by arguing that these controversial campaigns do not represent the entirety of the companies’ initiatives. Nonetheless, financial damage has already been inflicted upon these brands, as their stocks have fallen, and their revenues have been impacted significantly. For example, Bud Light experienced a 25.7% drop in sales as a result of their LGBTQ marketing campaign, and Target faced a two-week boycott which led to $13.8 billion in lost revenue, while North Face suffered from attacks by Boebert’s followers.
As demonstrated by the controversies surrounding these companies, LGBTQ marketing efforts can be a double-edged sword, polarizing consumers and impacting sales. Moreover, the backlash against such campaigns has been fueled by a number of opposing arguments, primarily relating to parental concerns, Satanism, and conservatism. However, there are also some legitimate concerns in relation to marketing strategies that seek to capitalize on social trends, issues, and movements.
Before reacting to such controversial marketing campaigns, it is important to step back and analyze the broader picture of the companies’ initiatives, with a view to understanding their motivations and techniques. Such companies operate in a highly competitive environment, which leads them to employ a variety of strategies to gain an advantage over their rivals. Invariably, these strategies involve capturing the hearts and minds of their potential consumers, particularly the younger generation, who tend to be early adopters of trends and early influencers of their peers.
Additionally, some companies may view their marketing endeavors through a lens of corporate social responsibility (CSR), looking to align their core values with the values of modern society. This approach entails taking a proactive and sometimes even provocative stance on social, economic, or environmental issues that resonate with their consumers and help to differentiate the company from its competitors.
However, marketing campaigns that seek to provoke controversy and polarization among their audiences are arguably more impactful and less sustainable than those that aim to appeal to a broader demographic. Such campaigns face the risk of rejection by a significant portion of the viewer population and, more importantly, can cast a negative image of the company and its brand. Consequently, it is imperative that companies undertake a careful analysis of their customer base and brand identity before embarking on such volatile campaigns.
To conclude, companies have the right to pursue their marketing activities in accordance with their strategy and values, but they should also be prepared to face the consequences of the reactions they provoke. It is also prudent that companies make the necessary efforts to communicate their stance and approach to controversial issues transparently and respectfully, in order to mitigate any negative impact on their brand and reputation.
Finally, as customers, we should try to exercise a rational and informed response to such campaigns, evaluating their messages and purpose carefully. We should be mindful that social issues and trends are complex and multifaceted, and that each consumer’s views and preferences are just as complicated and nuanced.
In the end, companies that demonstrate an inclusive and respectful approach to social issues, while also executing effective marketing strategies, are likely to succeed and prosper in the long term. Conversely, those that indulge in polarizing and controversial marketing may enjoy some short-term gains but will ultimately likely suffer reputational and financial setbacks.
In conclusion, LEGO has been hit by backlash over its LGBTQ campaign, but the toy maker has denied having released any transgender building sets for children. Meanwhile, LEGO has been found to have released a line of LGBTQ themed sets, which has triggered a lot of social media outrage. The responses to these campaigns can be highly polarizing, as has been seen with other brands that have recently undergone similar controversies. Such controversies raise important questions regarding the nature of marketing, consumer trends, and the role of social responsibility in business. As consumers, we should attempt to approach such campaigns in a rational, informed, and nuanced way, while also putting pressure on companies to behave responsibly.
