US Forget Kid Rock: Bud Light faces a new outrage

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Bud Light has had a rough few months.

The Anheuser-Busch (BUD) - Get Free Report brand has become the target of right-wing boycotts after it made two marketing missteps. The first, highlighted by the singer-songwriter Kid Rock in a now infamous social-media post, involved the former top-selling beer in the world partnering with the transgender social-media influencer Dylan Mulvaney.


The beer brand didn't hire Mulvaney for a splashy TV ad or even a major digital campaign. It sent her some cans with her face on them and paid her to post to her social-media accounts. In theory, the partnership was about getting more members of the LGBTQ+ community to try Bud Light.

Most of the time that promotion would have gone unnoticed, aside from Mulvaney's fanbase, which likely has little overlap with the core Bud Light drinker base.

But Rock posting a video of himself shooting up cases of the beer changed that.

Bud Light also suffered a second, more self-inflicted, wound when its marketing vice president, Alissa Heinerscheid, on a podcast called the brand's customers "fratty."

That double-edged sword angered the brand's fanbase and led to the boycott, which saw Bud Light lose nearly 30% of its sales. Now, the Anheuser-Busch brand faces a new backlash, except this time the story behind it is literally not true.



When the Bud Light scandal first broke, a number of celebrities, mostly country singers, aggressively went after the brand. Travis Tritt and John Rich (of Big & Rich fame) made comments about having the beer removed from their tour riders and not selling it at their bars.

Country legend Garth Brooks took the opposite tack, making clear that his in-construction Nashville bar would sell Bud Light and welcome LGBTQ+ customers.

The beer brand simply kept trying to operate as if nothing had happened.

Apologizing for the Mulvaney promotion would have required the brand to say that reaching out to the LGBTQ+ community was somehow wrong. So, the company put out commercials with football players and went back to posting its normal content on social media (all of which was met with mocking and often hateful/transphobic comments).

Now, the brand faces a new right-wing backlash over reports that it hired "The View" co-host Whoopi Goldberg as the new brand ambassador for Bud Light.

Picking the talk-show host, who is an outspoken liberal, would have been an odd choice for Anheuser-Busch, but the company never actually made that call as the stories reporting it -- picked up by multiple websites -- were made up.



Fake Bud Light assertion is easily debunked​

The original post, which appeared on a website called USA World News, reported the following opening paragraph.

"In an already tumultuous year for Bud Light, the brand finds itself in another quandary. Only days after announcing Whoopi Goldberg as their new brand ambassador in an audacious attempt to revive flagging sales, the beer giant is now reporting a staggering loss of billions in market value," the not-a-real-news site reported.

The article was picked up by a slew of other sites that are not exactly mainstream media, including lajthiza.info, usacommunity.live, moralstory.press, and others.

Yahoo UK, which truly is mainstream, reported that a "search of Facebook showed that users were placing blind faith in the article, despite the fact that a quick Google search for this supposedly 'breaking' story produced zero results from any credible news websites.

"Variations of the phrase "Go woke, go broke" turned up in the comments of several Facebook posts."

USA World News, which calls itself "USA New's" in its header, appears to aggregate entertainment news stories while occasionally making up its own "news." The Goldberg story, which reported that "Bud Light’s market value plummeted drastically within days of the announcement," can also easily be fact-checked and debunked.

The article first appeared on Aug. 25. A quick check of Anheuser-Busch's stock price over the past five days shows that the company's share value has actually increased. Over the past six months, the company's stock has dropped by about 6%.

Sales of Bud Light, however, remain well below traditional levels.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Why are they so hellbent on saying Bud's demise is all on Kid Rock? No one takes marching orders from Kid and he was outed as a faggot who drinks the troon juice weeks ago.
 
Why are they so hellbent on saying Bud's demise is all on Kid Rock? No one takes marching orders from Kid and he was outed as a faggot who drinks the troon juice weeks ago.
They want to cut off the head of the snake and thus need a proverbial and literal figurehead to do so. Otherwise they have no one to target to blame and figuratively and/or literally killed to stop and control the disobedient masses.
 
Last edited:
Apologizing for the Mulvaney promotion would have required the brand to say that reaching out to the LGBTQ+ community was somehow wrong.
It was wrong. Ignoring the degeneracy of that group from strictly a marketing perspective it was pants on head retarded and a good example to bring up the next time a company diversity hires a woman to run a primarily male brand.

Anyone possessing at the bare minimum a functional brain stem could have foreseen this disaster.
 
It was wrong. Ignoring the degeneracy of that group from strictly a marketing perspective it was pants on head retarded and a good example to bring up the next time a company diversity hires a woman to run a primarily male brand.

Anyone possessing at the bare minimum a functional brain stem could have foreseen this disaster.
It just dawned on me that they have been so successful in gaslighting that they made me think Mulvaney wasn't political. And I've thought about the Bud Light situation for a while because I love PR disasters. In all honestly I did think that "Bud Light just paid a vapid tiktoker to market their shit. Really why should I care?"

But Mulvaney is explicitly political. Mulvaney's whole thing is that he is a woman no different than females. I remember Drew Barrymore fawning over him like it was a feminist act to support this looney troon. And that is political. Because I'm sorry the truth fucking hurts but transgendered women are not women. We're culturally being brainwashed to put lipstick on a pig.
 
Apologizing for the Mulvaney promotion would have required the brand to say that reaching out to the LGBTQ+ community was somehow wrong. So, the company put out commercials with football players and went back to posting its normal content on social media (all of which was met with mocking and often hateful/transphobic comments).
Reaching to the LGTV+OLED bunch would've done nothing, they wont drink bud not because of some political reason but because bud its poor people beer and the gays are the most pretentious class-obssessed snobs out there.
Now, the brand faces a new right-wing backlash over reports that it hired "The View" co-host Whoopi Goldberg as the new brand ambassador for Bud Light.

Picking the talk-show host, who is an outspoken liberal,
Even if its a lie goldberg its far from just an "outspoken liberal", she's a complete lunatic, liar, racist and rape apologist.
he was outed as a faggot who drinks the troon juice weeks ago.
What?
 
They want to cut off the head of the snake and thus need a proverbial and literal figurehead to do so. Otherwise they have no one to target to blame and figuratively and/or literally killed to stop and control the disobedient masses.
Why do you think they are going so hard against Trump? They think of this shit like a video game.
 
Why do you think they are going so hard against Trump? They think of this shit like a video game.
I was referring just to the Troonie fluid boycott where there isn't any one person who started or leading it. Hence them trying to make Kid Rock the de facto leader for them to topple down and control.
 
I was referring just to the Troonie fluid boycott where there isn't any one person who started or leading it. Hence them trying to make Kid Rock the de facto leader for them to topple down and control.
It's how they see any idea they don't like. They act like no person could organically despise this shit
 
Why are they so hellbent on saying Bud's demise is all on Kid Rock? No one takes marching orders from Kid and he was outed as a faggot who drinks the troon juice weeks ago.
Because the alternative would be admitting to themselves that there is a substantial percentage of people who see Dyldo Faggins and are immediately disgusted by him, because he's a disgusting troon.

They can't allow the truth to penetrate the false narrative that they've constructed, in which supporting troonery is "gay rights 2.0" and only a few hateful Nazi bigots could conceivably be against the idea of sucking the girldick.
 
Why are they so hellbent on saying Bud's demise is all on Kid Rock? No one takes marching orders from Kid and he was outed as a faggot who drinks the troon juice weeks ago.
This is a shaming tactic.
They know Kid Rock is an embarrassing moron so associating this with him could potentially turn people away from the boycott.
What they don't seem to realize is that Dylan is way more embarrassing than some corny musician.
 
Back
Top Bottom