Introduction
This is “What Just Happened?,” the podcast that looks at the biggest brand crises of our time, what they meant for organisational strategy and behaviour, and their lasting impact on our approach to crisis communication.
I’m Kate Hartley. And I’m Tamara Littleton. And together, we’ll delve into what happened, why it mattered, and whether it could happen again.
Episode
Kate Hartley: Today, Tamara, we are looking at what happened when a brand got involved in an issue that it really had no right to, and we’ll come on to why later. But it faced a massive backlash from the conservative far-right, including some of its core customers. We’re also looking at the awful impact on an influencer at the centre of the backlash, who had done absolutely nothing to deserve it. So today, we are looking at Bud Light and the anti-trans rights lobby.
Tamara Littleton: I have a lot of thoughts on this one. I think we both do. Let’s just start with what happened, though. Let’s give the context.
KH: On the first of April 2023, Bud Light sent a special edition Bud Light can to Dylan Mulvaney, an influencer, model, and trans rights activist. One of their cans had Dylan’s face on it, and it was designed to celebrate her 365 days of womanhood. She was celebrating her transition.
TL: I mean, I think she’s amazing. And that’s a lovely bit of brand engagement, right?
KH: You’d think so, wouldn’t you? Dylan was one of hundreds of influencers that Bud Light partnered with on promotions like this. She did a short, fun video on her social media, showing her cracking open a can of Bud Light on Instagram. It should have been a lovely bit of influencer marketing for the brand. I agree with you; she’s fantastic—hugely positive, upbeat, and lovely. It should have been great.
TL: So what went wrong?
KH: There was a massive backlash—sadly, almost predictably. The conservative right in the US really didn’t like the fact that Bud Light was working with Dylan, nor did the right-leaning media in the UK or anywhere else, actually. Most of the discussion was really horrible and very personal to Dylan, targeting her, not just the brand.
One of the key things that made it worse was Kid Rock posting a video of himself shooting a load of Bud Light cans in protest and telling Bud Light in no uncertain terms what he thought of it.
Clip from Kid Rock’s video
Grandpa is feeling a little frisky today. Let me say something to all of you and be as clear and concise as possible. < Kid Rock fires rifle at Bud Light cans >
Bud Light, Anheuser-Busch, have a terrific day.
KH: That video got a couple of million views. He’s a lovely bloke, isn’t he? A real gentleman. He’s just added transphobia to a long list of other views. He used to display the Confederate flag in concerts and is well known for defending his right to make sexist, homophobic, and racist statements. So, yeah, generally a lovely bloke. But he wasn’t the only one.
There were a number of conservative influencers who denounced the brand, and people all over the US called for a boycott of Bud Light. The sentiment was broadly that Bud Light didn’t know its audience and shouldn’t work with Mulvaney.
Let’s come back and look at that later on. Initially, Bud Light put out a fairly neutral statement, trying to downplay the partnership with Dylan Mulvaney. The statement said:
“Anheuser-Busch, the parent company of Bud Light, works with hundreds of influencers across our brands as one of many ways to authentically connect with audiences across various demographics. From time to time, we produce unique commemorative cans for fans and brand influencers like Dylan Mulvaney. This commemorative can was a gift to celebrate a personal milestone and is not for sale to the general public.”
TL: There’s a bit of distance coming through there.
KH: Absolutely. They were starting to distance themselves. Then it got really horrible and personal for Mulvaney. People were deliberately misgendering her on social media, using hate speech, and being horribly abusive. She was specifically targeted, and it got really personal. Dylan didn’t react publicly initially; she stayed quiet. She did mention having had a bad week a few days later.
Later, she said on a podcast that she thought she might be seen as an easy target because she’s young and people think they can get at her. If you follow her on social media, you know that her posts are joyful, positive, life-affirming, and lovely. The one she did for Bud Light was the same—nothing controversial in it at all. To get all this hate was heartbreaking to watch.
TL: It was a full-on pileup, wasn’t it?
KH: It really was. It drove her offline for a few weeks. A few weeks later, she posted a TikTok talking about her experience. The line that really stuck with me was when she said, “I think it’s okay to be frustrated with someone or confused, but what I’m struggling to understand is the need to dehumanise and to be cruel.” Isn’t that heartbreaking?
TL: So heartbreaking. This really plays into the role of the brand in terms of safeguarding influencers. Influencers are humans. How did Bud Light actually respond to Dylan Mulvaney?
KH: This is the shocking part. She says they never contacted her at all through the whole thing—not to see if she was okay, not to protect her from the hate speech, nothing. A lot of people argued that Dylan wasn’t the right influencer to hit Bud Light’s target market. Maybe there’s some truth in that, but what is completely unforgivable is how they abandoned her throughout the process. They showed no compassion and tried to distance themselves from her.
TL: There were a lot of people criticising Bud Light while this was breaking. How did Bud respond to its critics?
KH: A couple of weeks later, Anheuser-Busch released a statement that indirectly referred to the brand’s partnership with Mulvaney, saying, “We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people. We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer.”
It seems quite specific about who they want to bring together over a beer. They didn’t do anything to help her. Anheuser-Busch’s response, rather than Bud Light’s, seemed like a parent apologising for a wayward child. They announced a shakeup of the Bud Light marketing team, which seemed like a response to this issue. They had no intention of standing by their work with Mulvaney.
TL: It sounds very much like throwing the marketing team under the bus.
KH: Exactly. Sometimes boycotts happen, and sometimes a brand is attacked without impacting sales.
TL: Do we know the effect on sales?
KH: It’s hard to know exactly, but there were reports about three weeks later that Bud Light sales dipped 17% since the backlash started. Bud Light was already experiencing a dip in sales, likely why they were trying something different in their marketing to attract a younger audience. During their May earnings call, they said sales were down 1% globally, which took its toll.
In July, hundreds of employees lost their jobs—about 2% of the US workforce. Anheuser-Busch announced a support package for wholesalers but still no support for Dylan Mulvaney. In that announcement, they said, “We are a beer company, and beer is for everyone.” I thought it was a promising statement, but then they said, “To all our valued customers, we hear you. Our summer advertising launches next week, and you can look forward to Bud Light reinforcing what you’ve always loved about our brand: easy to drink and easy to enjoy.” It wasn’t enough.
TL: “We hear the boycotters and the transphobes.”
KH: Yes. They didn’t hear the LGBTQ+ community or Dylan Mulvaney. Their subsequent advertising was all about the All-American family, barbecues, cowboy hats, and country music—very clearly trying to win back Heartland America without saying they could be there for everyone.
TL: What’s the long-term impact?
KH: The backlash raged for months. In July, Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, suggested that Anheuser-Busch had breached its fiduciary duties to shareholders by associating Bud Light with radical social ideologies. He suggested legal action against Anheuser-Busch because the Florida State Board of Administration, which manages the public sector retirement fund, has equity shares in AB InBev.
Fortunately, that didn’t come to anything. Bud Light made some bad decisions, posting a video on social media showing a woman carrying on eating while a storm rages around her, saying, “It’s fine. This is fine.” It was insensitive.
TL: So where are we now with all of this?
KH: Kid Rock posted a video in December 2023 saying he’s buying Bud Light again. A right-wing commentator, Matt Walsh, said Bud Light needs to grovel at our feet. Sales are still down, around 30% a week. It might be part of a longer-term trend, but this probably accelerated it.
TL: It’s terrible because it impacts the industry and other brands’ support for trans influencers. It’s bigger than just this.
KH: A lot of people said the subsequent attack on Target was a direct result of this. People were whipped into such a frenzy that it made subsequent decisions by brands much harder. The language like “grovel at our feet” indicates that someone has won.
TL: Could this have been avoided?
KH: If core customers left over the partnership with Mulvaney, Bud Light could have picked up new customers if they behaved differently. If this was part of a brand refresh, maybe they could have picked up new people. Nike’s campaign with Colin Kaepernick faced initial backlash, but long-term, it was a good decision because more people supported the brand for standing by Kaepernick. Bud Light could have done that if they behaved differently.
TL: They tried new markets, new audiences, and ended up alienating everyone.
KH: Exactly. It comes down to core values. I’d love to know what Bud Light’s or Anheuser-Busch’s core values are in this area. At some point, brands have to decide if beer is for everyone or if it’s for some people, excluding others. They seem to have landed in the latter category.
TL: Would you drink Bud Light now?
KH: I’d struggle with it because they’ve behaved so badly. It comes down to core values, and brands need to decide who they want to represent. Sometimes, you need to look around and ask if you want someone like Kid Rock to be your spokesperson. Look to the future and ask which side of history you want to land on.
Break
KH: We are really delighted to have Abby Hawker with us today to talk about the Bud Light issue. AH is the founder and CEO of Transmission PR, a communications consultancy that works with brands, individuals, and organisations committed to supporting the trans community. AH, should Bud Light have worked with Dylan in the first place, given that they were so unprepared for what happened?
Abby Hawker: This is a classic case of a brand jumping on the bandwagon. The suggestion seems to be that the marketing team wanted to make Bud Light less of a frat brand. Sales were dipping, and they wanted to appeal to a new audience. Including the trans community resonates with younger audiences and shows inclusivity. But they didn’t do their due diligence.
There have been good case studies, like Burberry’s Valentine’s Day campaign in 2023, which included a trans guy. It met backlash, and Burberry took down the image but didn’t communicate with the model. Calvin Klein faced backlash for a campaign with a pregnant trans man. Bud Light should have learned from these examples. They didn’t plan how to support Dylan or mitigate the backlash. They needed a risk assessment and a plan for potential outcomes.
KH: You hit the nail on the head—they didn’t know enough and weren’t prepared to support Dylan. They never intended to truly stand by her.
AH: It was so obviously performative. By not standing up for Dylan and not putting safeguards in place, they came across as weak, giving an opening for hatred. Kid Rock was given permission to behave as he did because Bud Light didn’t cancel him.
Brands often want to be inclusive and show diversity but are naive about the potential backlash. They don’t expect the level of hate that can come from these campaigns. Dylan wasn’t entering into a paid relationship with Bud Light; the can was sent to her. She faced bullying without support from Bud Light, which is unforgivable.
TL: It’s the epitome of dog whistling and then running away from it. Not a human response at all.
KH: It was absolutely horrible. The hatred was unforgivable, and Bud Light’s lack of support was extraordinary. Human beings create these campaigns, and seeing someone bullied should invoke a human response to stand up for them.
AH: Exactly. Brands need to lean into their values and be inclusive responsibly and with respect.
Outro
You’ve been listening to “What Just Happened?” with Kate Hartley and Tamara Littleton. If you enjoyed the podcast, please subscribe, rate, and review.