From Consumer Brands to Firebrands. Can Starbucks & Co Make America Great Again?
There’s an awful lot blowin’ in the wind these days. The air has become polluted by the first two weeks of this new Administration faster than you can spell out the EPA. Cries, lies, resigned sighs, acrid smells and acrimonious yells: the burnt-cordite aftermath of Trumpian Executive Orders as he lobs another grenade into the democratic process, howls of protest from the outraged Press, the toxic reek of injustice, hypocrisy and double-dealing, all mingle with the scent of revolution… and amid the sulfurous ferment, the faint aroma of something hopeful, like freshly milled beans wafting through a cloud of filthy traffic fumes.
Yes, indeed, it is time to wake up and smell the coffee. And for a couple of reasons, make yours a Starbucks in future, if you please. This may sound insincere coming from a New Yorker, coffee snobs as most of us are, and spoiled for choice at that. Until lately, Brooklyn Coffee Roasters, Grumpy, Jack’s, Toby’s Estate, Stumptown & Co have made it easy to resist the allure of Starbies and its zippy 90s clichés, faux ethnic décor and fair-trade posturing. There always seemed to be something phony about this progressive green face on the United States of Generica, relentlessly expanding to a ubiquitous presence on the backs of low-paid baristas, catering to the personal identity delusions of doomed office drones, putting more authentic local cafes out of business.
But thanks to the vision of its CEO, Howard Schultz, Starbucks has regained its mojo, and is leading the charge in a brand marketing, possibly even full-scale socio-economic revolution and — I’m ready to up the ante here — potentially saving us all from going to Hell in a hand-basket, as seems increasingly likely with every passing day. (Do I have your attention now? Great! Read on)
Aforementioned atmospheric disturbances don’t come much bigger and pyrotechnically brasher than the annual Super Bowl. Last week’s event was also characterized by a distinct new media trend: a welter of politically conscious brand advertising. Championed by the production itself that featured Lady Gaga as half-time star, Coke, Audi, Air BnB, 84 Lumber, Budweiser even… all came out of the blocks with strong statements about diversity, immigration and equal opportunity. As Ad Week reported, these ads don’t get commissioned overnight. They are mainly the result of months of planning and part of a coherent strategy, showing that major consumer brands will — by definition — always come out on the side of the people.
These brands aren’t just along for the ride in the increasing Politicization of Everything. They — or certainly the smart ones that have generally read the tea leaves right — are picking up the banner and putting out a rallying cry. At a time when everyone is suddenly searching for a solution and no one seems to know much for sure about anything, rich dividends may accrue to anyone who is willing to make a stand. The same week as Super Bowl and CEO Schultz’s valiant declaration that Starbucks would hire 10,000 refugees, Senator Bernie Sanders addressed the Sister Giant conference in DC — www.sistergiant.com — established by Marianne Williamson to explore the intersection of spirituality and politics, and drawing inspiration from the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi.
“Politics should be sacred,” said the great man (Gandhi, not the Bern), and no doubt he was right. But few would contest that there is much sacred about the current state of Washington DC. “Sacre Bleu!” more like. The concept of spiritual activism in politics is problematic, partly because of a lack of a coherent agenda among the enlightened, spread out as they are across a loose federation of constituencies. The political situation has rarely been more tribal and divisive, conditions that benefit single-issue advocates and extremists, not believers in the principles of universal love, sharing and open-mindedness.
A recent salon in New York, featuring Ms Williamson and hosted by Daniel Pinchbeck (whose excellent new book ‘How Soon is Now’ sets out a manifesto for personal and planetary change), posed the question ‘Is it time for a spiritual revolution?’ but soon dissolved into a series of familiar laments on various matters of perceived injustice, and frustratingly circular arguments over the intractable issues of the day.
Don’t even get me started on solving the planetary crisis, let’s just take a leaf out of Starbucks’s book and try to do something about immigration and refugees. Look for example at the utterly depressing demise of the Dubs Amendment in the UK. Driven by a wave of popular emotion, the Brits last year committed to welcoming in 3000 children from refugee camps. Not a lot compared to the 200,000 from war-torn former Yugoslavia in the ’90s, but hey, those were happier times. Then last week, Theresa May’s government drastically cut that number to just 350. It leaves one wondering, When they do that, which constituency exactly do they think they serve?
The trouble is that governments don’t behave with compassion like most people do. Because of the way they are wired as organisms, they don’t have an individual’s integrity or strength of will. They make compassionate noises, and then succumb to less rational, self-preserving reflexes, like elephants frightened of mice. And so we arrive at the conclusion that, rather than trying to engender more spiritually enlightened politics, maybe we all should just stick to our swim lanes, and look beyond government to save us from the mess we’re in.
Professionals in Journalism and the Justice system will fight tooth and claw by non-violent means to oppose the new regime’s attempts to undermine our democratic institutions. And where else the forces of spirituality come up short in politics, enlightened brands can also pick up the charge. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that commercial interests will ultimately be more effective agents of change than politicized spiritual ones.
Consider the observable trends. Who, honestly, has an answer for the effects of automation on the global workforce over the next decades? Automation is going to put 100millions of people out of traditional work. Those jobs will NOT be replaced in a new utopian tech growth sector. We are going to see one human + machines doing better and faster what it used to take 10 people to do. This means that things are going to be cheaper. Which, combined with a massive, global, technology-enabled shift towards sharing and renting rather than owning, means less buying of goods and less corporate profit, less wealth to ‘trickle down’ (assuming that it does) and more unemployment.
Policymakers can try to legislate for this, and our lifetimes may well see the introduction of a guaranteed universal salary and a 3-day working week imposed on certain sectors so that workers can share the same job. Meaning that 100millions will have a lot of time on their hands and will be looking for services and experiences to keep them occupied, presenting widespread job opportunities to the creative middle class (while the manual labor force is presumably redirected to stack Styrofoam sheets in the Arctic where the polar ice cap used to be, and build solar farms down in Arizona etc). As anyone who works in Marketing and who’s been watching lately can tell you, we’re moving away from products and commodities towards platforms and experiences. The savvy brands have seen this coming. BMW for example is shifting from being an auto-maker to ‘mobility services provider’. It’s the logical next step, and, one hopes, ultimately the benign alignment of corporate social responsibility and brand marketing.
Politics are symptomatic and only part of the story. When we consider the limitations of legislation, the argument grows for sticking to our swim lanes and looking to Media and Experiential Marketing — the experts in consumer influence and distraction — to deliver a socio-economic solution. It makes even more sense if you believe that cultural rifts and structural aberrations in mass media were largely responsible for the wayward result of the last US presidential election. Trump, riding high on his ‘Movement’, was a symptom not a cause, in nature as well as appearance the archetypal custard-headed pustule erupting on the arse, then the face of the body politic. The media’s addiction to advertising $ and cheap, sensationalist entertainment proved its undoing in that campaign. As the various branches of resistance line up against him and other destructive forces that threaten our future, the fight will become localized to within each branch and divide up along the traditional dichotomies that exist within them. Within media, branding and experiential marketing, there will be those who opt for the opiate of the masses approach, content to distract the consumer with cheesy happiness moments instead of leveraging the power of their digital networks and physical footprints to create something more meaningful in our lives.
Think how this could play out. On the dystopian tip, we work out our time in a Brave New World /Black Mirror scenario, plugged into hamster wheel VR machines, being pumped full of cannabinoid-infused sugar drinks while doing 360 tours of Kim Kardashian’s boudoir & backside. A more optimistic alternative would be to use the new technology to bring people together in “virtual real life swaps”. For better or worse, these are the experiences you remember, the ones with more meaning: human contact that takes you out of your comfort zone. And surely an excellent antidote to fake news, is putting diverse people together to share authentic experiences. It may sound granola, but it works.
In the catering analogy, there will be those who, faced with hungry consumers, will guilefully slide the sugary cinnabon under their noses, leaving them feeling sickly and bloated (and kid themselves they have done their shareholders a favor by returning them a few bucks, while contributing to the obesity of their children); and there will be those who use their wit and style to persuade the consumers to try the wholesome broth or the kale salad, and surprise them by how delicious and fortifying it is.
This is not theory, it’s happening in practice, thanks to the brand that helped define the gold standard in experiential marketing. When it comes to customizing a commodity worth pennies into an experience worth paying $3 or more for, and then scaling the bejeezus out of it, no brand on earth has done that better than Starbucks. Now the siren from Seattle is taking it to the next level, by actually committing to hiring people from across the culture divide, and physically putting them in front of Starbucks customers. It’s hard to persist in thinking of someone as a potential terrorist, when you’re watching them put a smiley face in your cappuccino froth. Where activism meets activation, one might say.
Although the refugee hire got the headlines, there was more to the Starbucks CEO’s announcement the other day. His was not just a commitment to employ 10000 refugees across 75 countries, but also a reiteration of support for Veterans, a call to build bridges not walls with Mexican partners, and a pledge to provide healthcare to all of the brand’s partners. A broad and brave swipe back at a raft of egregious government declarations, and it gave me hope for a brighter future
In return, Howard Shultz got to repeat his mission statement on a big stage, and rarely has the sound of a CEO trotting out his brand values rung more true. In light of what’s actually at stake here to many of these people, it’s enough to bring tears to your eyes:
“Starbucks has and will always stand for opportunity… We are in business to inspire and nurture the human spirit, one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time — whether that neighborhood is in a Red State or a Blue State; a Christian country or a Muslim country; a divided nation or a united nation. That will not change”
That’s leadership. Thanks Howard! You can make mine a Grande Americano, with all the trimmings.
===========================
