More Gen Zs and Millennials believe that messaging in advertising can create social impact, and want brands to continue raising awareness for social issues.
When it comes to taking a stance on social issues, brands know that they are treading dangerous waters - they could either successfully ride the waves of the latest talk of the town, or get ploughed by the waves, hard.
Samsung recently released an ad to promote their wearables in Singapore, which featured a Muslim mother embracing her drag queen son. The ad was quickly taken down after drawing ire, including Muslims in Singapore who felt that it was “insensitive”, "mainstreaming homosexuality" and "surfaced much confusion and questions amongst the (Muslim) community".
The removal of the ad, however, drew criticisms from supporters and members of the LGBTQ+ community, notably from local drag queen Vanda Miss Joaquim, who accused the company of using LGBTQ+ members as “accessories” and “milk[ing] the pink dollars”.
How did this news affect consumers’ perceptions of Samsung?
We conducted a survey with N=1000 respondents in Singapore, representative of the resident population by age, gender and ethnicity to find out what people think about this news, and their opinions of brands’ participation in discourses of social issues via marketing campaigns. Responses were segmented by the age brackets of respondents as follows: Gen Zs (16-25), Millennials (26-41), Gen Xers (42-57) and Baby Boomers (58 and above).
18% of respondents indicated that their impression of Samsung has become somewhat or much more negative, and 65% were not affected by the news. A smaller group (14%) of respondents said that this news has made them a little or much less likely to buy from Samsung, and 68% said that it had no impact.
Overall, this news did not seem to have a vastly negative impact on the tech giant. However, a breakdown of results by age reveals that respondents who felt most negatively about this news tend to be the Gen Zs, with 23% - compared to the average of 18% - indicating that their impression of Samsung has become somewhat or much more negative.
Brands’ participation in social causes are important to younger consumers
Gen Zs are an emerging group of consumers who, compared to other age groups, are more supportive of brands that are not afraid to state their stance/opinions (54% vs average of 40%); Millennials as well, although less so at 44%.
For Millennials and particularly Gen Zs, Samsung’s response to the backlash by removing the ad was a bigger issue than the ad itself. Among younger consumers, there are more who think that Samsung rightfully published it, and fewer who agreed with the subsequent removal. Meanwhile, it’s the opposite for Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, who tend to believe that the ad shouldn’t have been published in the first place.
The removal of the ad implied a few things about Samsung: featuring an LGBTQ+ member was more of a marketing ploy than a genuine attempt at inclusivity, and the brand was not ready to affirm its support for the community - explaining younger consumers’ ire towards the corporate giant’s decision.
Should brands still talk about LGBTQ+ or any sensitive social issues in Singapore?
65% of respondents indicated that Singapore is not ready for public messages (including advertisements) that feature LGBTQ+ members, especially among Gen Xers (72%). Meanwhile, only 55% of Gen Zs indicated so.
That is not to say that brands should avoid talking about social issues altogether:
- Only 48% agreed that “brands should not mention sensitive social issues in their advertisements at all”, skewing towards Gen Xers (59%) and Baby Boomers (65%).
Consumers are not naive, and they are very much aware that brands’ activism is a part of marketing strategies. However, they also recognise the value of established brands getting the message out:
- 51% believe that when brands feature LGBTQ+ members in the ads, they can in fact help to raise awareness
- 27% also believe that doing so helps to push for change
Consumers recognise corporate performative activism when there’s one, and thus brands need to be well-prepared when they set out to make social impact part of its messaging.
The full report covers insights to:
- Views of LGBTQ+ issues in Singapore
- Opinions of Samsung’s ad and how it may or may not have contributed to the LGBTQ+ cause
- Changes in perception and likelihood of purchase by Samsung’s customers and non-customers (based on purchase in past 1 year)
- Opinions of whether brands should challenge social norms or create social impact in their advertisements
Reach out to us for the full report.
Check out results to a previous poll conducted in 2020 about brands’ participation in social movements following the George Floyd protests here.
Methodology:
Based on a Milieu survey conducted with N=1000 respondents in Singapore, representative of the resident population by age, gender and ethnicity. The survey was conducted from 24 to 26 January 2022.
Should brands talk about LGBTQ+ issues in Singapore?
More Gen Zs and Millennials believe that messaging in advertising can create social impact, and want brands to continue raising awareness for social issues.
When it comes to taking a stance on social issues, brands know that they are treading dangerous waters - they could either successfully ride the waves of the latest talk of the town, or get ploughed by the waves, hard.
Samsung recently released an ad to promote their wearables in Singapore, which featured a Muslim mother embracing her drag queen son. The ad was quickly taken down after drawing ire, including Muslims in Singapore who felt that it was “insensitive”, "mainstreaming homosexuality" and "surfaced much confusion and questions amongst the (Muslim) community".
The removal of the ad, however, drew criticisms from supporters and members of the LGBTQ+ community, notably from local drag queen Vanda Miss Joaquim, who accused the company of using LGBTQ+ members as “accessories” and “milk[ing] the pink dollars”.
How did this news affect consumers’ perceptions of Samsung?
We conducted a survey with N=1000 respondents in Singapore, representative of the resident population by age, gender and ethnicity to find out what people think about this news, and their opinions of brands’ participation in discourses of social issues via marketing campaigns. Responses were segmented by the age brackets of respondents as follows: Gen Zs (16-25), Millennials (26-41), Gen Xers (42-57) and Baby Boomers (58 and above).
18% of respondents indicated that their impression of Samsung has become somewhat or much more negative, and 65% were not affected by the news. A smaller group (14%) of respondents said that this news has made them a little or much less likely to buy from Samsung, and 68% said that it had no impact.
Overall, this news did not seem to have a vastly negative impact on the tech giant. However, a breakdown of results by age reveals that respondents who felt most negatively about this news tend to be the Gen Zs, with 23% - compared to the average of 18% - indicating that their impression of Samsung has become somewhat or much more negative.
Brands’ participation in social causes are important to younger consumers
Gen Zs are an emerging group of consumers who, compared to other age groups, are more supportive of brands that are not afraid to state their stance/opinions (54% vs average of 40%); Millennials as well, although less so at 44%.
For Millennials and particularly Gen Zs, Samsung’s response to the backlash by removing the ad was a bigger issue than the ad itself. Among younger consumers, there are more who think that Samsung rightfully published it, and fewer who agreed with the subsequent removal. Meanwhile, it’s the opposite for Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, who tend to believe that the ad shouldn’t have been published in the first place.
The removal of the ad implied a few things about Samsung: featuring an LGBTQ+ member was more of a marketing ploy than a genuine attempt at inclusivity, and the brand was not ready to affirm its support for the community - explaining younger consumers’ ire towards the corporate giant’s decision.
Should brands still talk about LGBTQ+ or any sensitive social issues in Singapore?
65% of respondents indicated that Singapore is not ready for public messages (including advertisements) that feature LGBTQ+ members, especially among Gen Xers (72%). Meanwhile, only 55% of Gen Zs indicated so.
That is not to say that brands should avoid talking about social issues altogether:
- Only 48% agreed that “brands should not mention sensitive social issues in their advertisements at all”, skewing towards Gen Xers (59%) and Baby Boomers (65%).
Consumers are not naive, and they are very much aware that brands’ activism is a part of marketing strategies. However, they also recognise the value of established brands getting the message out:
- 51% believe that when brands feature LGBTQ+ members in the ads, they can in fact help to raise awareness
- 27% also believe that doing so helps to push for change
Consumers recognise corporate performative activism when there’s one, and thus brands need to be well-prepared when they set out to make social impact part of its messaging.
The full report covers insights to:
- Views of LGBTQ+ issues in Singapore
- Opinions of Samsung’s ad and how it may or may not have contributed to the LGBTQ+ cause
- Changes in perception and likelihood of purchase by Samsung’s customers and non-customers (based on purchase in past 1 year)
- Opinions of whether brands should challenge social norms or create social impact in their advertisements
Reach out to us for the full report.
Check out results to a previous poll conducted in 2020 about brands’ participation in social movements following the George Floyd protests here.
Methodology:
Based on a Milieu survey conducted with N=1000 respondents in Singapore, representative of the resident population by age, gender and ethnicity. The survey was conducted from 24 to 26 January 2022.
