# data[].attributes.body
I conducted a survey and received 110 respondents. This survey had a mix of different questions about brands and cancel culture. It really benefited my research for the main report.

The full survey, including questions and responses can be found in the appendix of my report.

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out on Instagram DM to uk transgender influencer, Bel Priestley who has over a million TikTok followers. I asked if she would answer some question on cancel culture and the Bud Light x Dylan Mulvaney situation and she answered my questions through voice notes.

The full transcript of the voice notes can be found in my appendix of my report.

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out to Dylan Mulvaney's management via email to see if she would answer any questions regarding the situation. However, I never received a response.

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out to Elle Darby on Instagram DM's and Email to see if she would let me interview her, regarding cancel culture, but I did't hear back.

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out to Jay Richards, who is Co-founder of Imagen Insights as he had wrote piece about the Bud Light situation with Dylan Mulvaney, however, he didn't respond.

# data[].attributes.body
This article will allow me to fully understand why Bud Light was cancelled, what happened and who was involved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In early April, Bud Light sent an influencer named Dylan Mulvaney a handful of beers. Mulvaney, in turn, posted a video of herself dressed like Holly Golightly from Breakfast at Tiffany's, using said beers to celebrate both March Madness and her first year of womanhood. One of the cans featured her image. It was part of a paid sponsorship deal and promotion for some sort of sweepstakes challenge where people can win $15,000 from Bud Light by sending in videos of themselves carrying a lot of beers.

This made some people very mad, and not because Holly Golightly wasn't really a beer gal (her preference was the White Angel, a boozy mix of vodka and gin, which, whew). Instead, they were upset because Mulvaney is transgender.

Trans issues are currently front and center in America's culture war. Anti-trans sentiment is sweeping many corners of the right, targeting children, drag shows, driver's licenses, and health care, among other areas. It's showing up in conservative media and conservative legislation and even working itself into the mainstream.

Since then, Bud Light has found itself in the eye of the anti-trans storm. Kid Rock shot cases of the beer, and Travis Tritt said he's banning the brand from his tour. Many on the right have called for a boycott of the bestselling beer in the country. If this all sounds ludicrous, it's because it kind of is. It's also indicative of where we are in the United States today.

How big a deal is this for Bud Light? The answer will ultimately probably be not very, though the controversy has dragged out, and Bud Light's sales have taken at least a temporary hit.

"They'll be drinking them in a month, as soon as the news cycle quits"

Don, a liquor store owner in Arkansas who requested to be referred to by a pseudonym so he "doesn't get caught up in the wokeness," told me he had seen a 20 to 25 percent dip in Bud Light sales in the days after the controversy hit, with his admittedly small sample size of shoppers seemingly opting for Miller Lite and Coors Light instead. However, he didn't expect the backlash to stick. "A lot of people are talking about it, fired up about it, they're never drinking Bud Light again, yada yada yada, but they'll be drinking them in a month, as soon as the news cycle quits," he said. That's not exactly how it's played out.

Typically, in terms of hurting sales, boycotts tend not to be super effective as most people don't respond, let alone stick to them. Remember the Great Keurig Boycott of 2017? Or Frito-Lay in 2021? Or, more recently, when people were mad because M&Ms were girls? If Bud Light did a campaign like this, it probably thought it would help its sales with some segment of consumers, though its reaction to the controversy has been less than ideal and made people across the political spectrum - including Mulvaney - angry, perhaps undercutting that intent.

Bigger picture, Bud Light's parent company, Anheuser-Busch InBev, has tons of brands under its umbrella and is worth over $100 billion. Its stock price has moved downward somewhat since the controversy took hold, but it's still trading at around where it was at the start of the year, and well above last fall. There have also been worrying developments.

On April 13, Vox was copied on multiple emails apparently also sent to Anheuser-Busch saying that bombs had been placed at various company locations.

"The safety of our employees is always our top priority. We are working with local law enforcement to ensure the security of our people and our facilities," an Anheuser-Busch spokesperson said in a statement to Vox.

"They're just far more diversified and globalized than this market and this one brand, and bringing a substantial, sustained boycott against them to pressure them into walking back their support for trans people or however you interpret this campaign, it would require just an enormous amount of coordination and discipline that, frankly, the right wing in this country just doesn't really display for stuff like this," said Dave Infante, a beer columnist for VinePair and the publisher of the drinks newsletter Fingers. "There will be some wobbles here and there, but in terms of the company's overall orientation and what it's driving at, if they walk this back, it's because they lost nerve, not because they lost sales."

The Bud-lash, explained

On April 1, Mulvaney, 26, posted the video in question with the Bud Light cans and the sponsorship. For a company with as big an ad budget as Budweiser, these types of partnerships with influencers are generally pretty small potatoes. That's not to say Mulvaney's reach isn't big - she's got 1.8 million followers on Instagram and 10.8 million on TikTok and has deals ( some now controversial) with multiple brands. But her reach isn't Super Bowl-ad big.

The post started to pick up steam in conservative circles relatively quickly. Right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro decried the collaboration on his show, saying, "Well, folks, our culture has now decided men are women and women are men and you must be forced to consume products that say so." Shapiro appears not to be much of a Bud Light fan himself, so he probably doesn't have much to boycott. "I understand Bud Light is piss water masquerading as beer," he said, "so I guess that, you know, it's sort of trans beer."

'90s rocker Kid Rock posted a video of himself shooting a few cases of Bud Light, which he presumably paid for. "Fuck Bud Light, and fuck Anheuser-Busch," he said, "have a terrific day." Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) put up a photo of a Coors Light case in the back of her vehicle on Twitter, the accompanying caption reading, "I would have bought the king of beers, but it changed it's [sic] gender to the queen of beers."

The country singer Travis Tritt said he would drop Anheuser-Busch from his tour and seemed to blame Bud Light's Mulvaney deal on Europe. (Anheuser-Busch sold to Belgian company InBev in 2008, and to be honest here there's a whole thing to get into about concentration in the beer market, but that's not a today problem.)

In full disclosure, I was on a tour sponsored by Budweiser in the 90's. That was when Anheuser-Busch was American owned. A great American company that later sold out to the Europeans and became unrecognizable to the American consumer. Such a shame.
- Travis Tritt (@Travistritt) April 6, 2023

So now the Bud-lash is a whole thing, as is the backlash to the Bud-lash. Radio personality Howard Stern said he's " dumbfounded" at all the hullabaloo, wondering on air, with regard to Kid Rock and Tritt, "Why do you care so much?" Fellow country singer Zach Bryan - who politically seems pretty cool - criticized Tritt relatively lightly on Twitter: "I just think insulting transgender people is completely wrong because we live in a country where we can all just be who we want to be," he wrote. Bryan also assured Tritt he would "drink enough [Jack Daniels] for both of us" because Tritt appears to have discovered the liquor company partnered with RuPaul's Drag Race a while back.

Anheuser-Busch generally appears to be trying to ride the wave, though the backlash is fierce. There was a rumor that it had laid off its entire marketing team, but that rumor is made up. However, the company has put two marketing executives on leave. It also canceled an event in Missouri in early April, citing safety concerns for its employees.

There was also a rumor that the Mulvaney cans were for sale to the public. They are not, though Bud Light did make limited-edition she/her cans now popping up on right-wing social media available in Canada for Pride in 2022, which ... is not a big deal. Anheuser-Busch CEO Michel Doukeris got at the issue of bad information going around during the company's earnings call in May, pointing out that "misinformation and confusion" still exists around what even happened. "We will need to continue to clarify the fact that this was one can, one influencer, one post, and not a campaign, and repeat this message for some time," he said.

"Anheuser-Busch works with hundreds of influencers across our brands as one of many ways to authentically connect with audiences across various demographics," a spokesperson said in an emailed statement to multiple media outlets, including Vox, as the backlash set in. "From time to time we produce unique commemorative cans for fans and for 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."

On April 14, Anheuser-Busch released a lengthy, quite tepid statement from its CEO, Brendan Whitworth, saying he is "responsible for ensuring every consumer feels proud of the beer we brew" and highlighting the number of people the company and its distributors employ. "We have thousands of partners, millions of fans and a proud history supporting our communities, military, first responders, sports fans and hard-working Americans everywhere," he said. "We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people. We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer."

The company didn't respond to a follow-up asking whether they would still be working with Mulvaney.

Infante said that statement seemed like a "fundamental misreading" of the stakes of the situation. "Not only does this statement look like the brewer is walking back its stated DEI commitments (which will anger progressive customers and staff), but it's not going to cool any heads on the right," he said. "I honestly think this was worse than saying nothing. They just prolonged the news cycle another few days, because now their Republican antagonists in the media, Congress, and every statehouse in the country have more to work with."

Many on the right were not appeased by Anheuser-Busch's statement and are continuing to call for a boycott. Also on April 14, Bud Light's social media accounts posted for the first time since the Mulvaney controversy began, and those posts - a simple "TGIF?" - were met with furor. The same goes for a pro-America ad for Budweiser released the same day.

There's not agreement among conservatives as to whether a boycott should go on. Donald Trump Jr. called for it to end in April. In May, former President Donald Trump weighed in on the issue for the first time, writing on Truth Social, "It's time to beat the Radical Left at their own game. Money does talk-Anheuser-Busch now understands that," in a promotion for a book about conservative companies to buy from. (He hasn't been very vocal about the issue. As Insider notes, financial filings show he is an AB InBev shareholder.)

Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) are calling for a probe into whether Bud Light's one-post campaign with Mulvaney, who is 26, amounts to marketing to underage people because her audience "skews younger."

Anheuser-Busch's reaction to conservative anger hasn't played particularly well with the left, either. Some progressives and LGBTQ advocates are now calling for a boycott of the company over what they view as a backtrack on the Mulvaney deal.

On June 29, Mulvaney posted an emotional video on Instagram addressing the controversy for the first time. "What transpired from that video was more bullying and transphobia than I could have ever imagined," she said, noting that it was "just an Instagram video." She said Bud Light had not reached out to her since the backlash hit and that brands not standing by trans people "gives customers permission to be as transphobic as they want." She also addressed the politics of the matter, saying, "Babe, supporting trans people shouldn't be political."

If you like your Bud Light, you can keep it (and if you're mad at it, you probably won't be for long)

Whether this current boycott will have much of a lasting impact on Bud Light's sales remains to be seen, but if history is any indicator, the answer is probably no. Boycotts tend to damage a company's reputation more than they do its bottom line.

Big beer companies, such as AB InBev and Molson Coors and Constellation Brands, are constantly looking for new markets and new niches to shore up the growth of their existing beer portfolios, Infante explained. "These are tough brands to find growth for - Bud Light has been shedding barrels of volume for years. It's past its prime; it will not be the largest beer in the country much longer," he said. "This is standard-issue pinkwashing stuff. They're looking for ways to quote-unquote align their values with customer segments that they think maybe they can still find some loyalty in."

Companies trying to appeal to the queer community is nothing new. Just look at how corporatized Pride Month has become - it's good business to at least appear LGBTQ-friendly. That isn't lost on Bud Light.

In the wake of this controversy, a March podcast interview with Alissa Heinerscheid, Bud Light's vice president of marketing, started to make the rounds in which she acknowledged some of the brand's troubles. "I had a really clear job to do when I took over Bud Light, and it was, 'This brand is in decline, it's been in a decline for a really long time, and if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand there will be no future for Bud Light,'" she said, adding that she wanted to update the company's "fratty" image. Heinerscheid is one of the two executives placed on leave.

"The white male customer who used to drink a lot of Bud Light doesn't anymore, and Bud Light has no choice but to find people who do"

In right-wing media, those comments are being spun to suggest Bud Light wants to get rid of its more typical white male demographic, but that's not really what's going on. Bud Light has been losing ground to other beers, such as craft beers and Modelo and Michelob Ultra, as well as to spirits, for quite some time now. It's looking for new customers wherever it can find them. "The reality is much more simple - it's that the white male customer who used to drink a lot of Bud Light doesn't anymore, and Bud Light has no choice but to find people who do," Infante said. "There's just no growth for Bud Light in its traditional core audience the way it used to have and used to be able to rely on."

Some of that traditional core audience, even though it's not growing, feels betrayed by Bud Light's LGBTQ outreach and alliance, however small, with a trans woman. They feel like it's gone "woke," like another part of the country's culture is changing around them in a way that's uncomfortable.

"You're talking about a demographic that's drinking that beer here locally that's about as far from that as you can get. You're talking about some blue-collar working men. Women don't drink that beer a lot or just in general, and sure, they just kind of struck a nerve with their base, potentially," Don, the liquor store owner, said. On a consumer level, Don is actually a little bit of Bud Light's problem. He doesn't drink it and prefers Michelob Ultra instead - though that's also made by AB InBev. (Seriously, concentration in the beer industry is a thing.)

The controversy over Bud Light's partnership has gone on longer than many people initially expected. Bud Light sales were down by 23 percent from a year ago in the week ending on April 29, and Budweiser sales were down by 11 percent. Sales of other AB InBev products, such as Michelob Ultra, have fallen, too. HSBC analyst Carlos Laboy downgraded AB InBev's stock in May, saying the Mulvaney dustup has caused "deeper problems than ABI admits" and criticizing company management's handling of the matter. "The way this Bud Light crisis came about a month ago, management's response to it and the loss of unprecedented volume and brand relevance raises many questions," he wrote.

It's worth noting here that AB InBev is hardly some pro-trans hero. The company's Friday statement signals it's at the very least aware that it's angered some of its customers, and beyond that, this Mulvaney partnership is ultimately about the company trying to generate profits. It also papers over some much less LGBTQ-friendly actions. Anheuser-Busch has made multiple donations to anti-LGBTQ and anti-trans politicians over time - Popular Info has a whole rundown of the company's activities. In 2021, New York City's famous Stonewall Inn said it wouldn't sell Anheuser-Busch's beers during Pride weekend in protest of its contributions to lawmakers who have supported anti-LGBTQ legislation.

While corporate decisions sometimes serve as flash points in America's culture wars, it's probably important to point out that, by and large, they don't have values. Or rather, they have only one: money.
Update, June 30, 10:40 am ET: This story was originally published on April 12 and has been updated multiple times, most recently to include the ongoing effects on Anheuser-Busch's business and Mulvaney's June video.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Bud Light boycott?? because sure, explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Conservatives such as Travis Tritt, Kid Rock, and Ben Shapiro are calling for a boycott of Anheuser-Busch's Bud Light after the beer company partnered with a trans influencer.

# data[].attributes.body
This article will provide me with statistics about the loss of sales Bud Light has been facing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Critics of Bud Light burned empty beer boxes and fired bullets at cans as part of an anti-trans backlash against the brand that erupted early last month. Since then, the anger has grown.

Sales of Bud Light have recorded declines for six consecutive weeks after a product endorsement from Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender influencer, set off ire among many conservatives.

Consumer boycotts typically fizzle but this one has expanded for an array of reasons: a hot-button political controversy over a product with ample alternatives, outcry from political figures and celebrities and amplification on social media, experts told ABC News.

The boycott grew even larger, meanwhile, after the initial response from the company was perceived as conciliatory by some LGBTQ advocates, prompting a wave of frustration on the left, the experts added.

"Generally, boycotts get called and have very little effect," Gerald Davis, a professor of organizational behavior at the University of Michigan Graduate School of Business. "For now, everybody is mad."

Sales of Bud Light fell nearly 25% over the week ending on May 13 compared to the same period a year ago, according to data from Bump Williams Consulting and Nielsen NIQ obtained by ABC News.

The most recent decline showed a deepening of losses after a drop of some 23% the week prior compared to a year ago and a roughly 7% year-over-year drop for the week ending on April 9, soon after the boycott began, the data showed.

Meanwhile, sales of rival beers have surged. Sales of Coors Light jumped almost 23% over the week ending on May 13 compared to a year ago; while sales of Miller Lite climbed 21% over that period, the data showed.

"In the beer world, there are thousands of other options readily available at similar price points," Anson Frericks, a former Anheuser-Busch executive, told ABC News. "Every grocery store and bar usually has the other options."

In all, the stock price for Anheuser-Busch InBev, the maker of Bud Light, has fallen about 11% since Mulvaney posted the brief Instagram endorsement video that sparked the backlash.

In a statement to ABC News, an Anheuser-Busch spokesperson said, "Bud Light remains the #1 brand in the US nationally in volume and dollar sales despite regional differences."

After the initial boycott, Anheuser-Busch InBev posted a statement from CEO Brendan Whitworth on its website.

"We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people," Whitworth said. "We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer."

Dylan Mulvaney attends the 65th GRAMMY Awards, Feb. 5, 2023, in Los Angeles.

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for The Recording Academy

The company also placed two executives who oversaw the endorsement of Mulvaney's Instagram post on leave, the Wall Street Journal reported last month.

The response drew sharp criticism from some LGBTQ advocates who considered it a capitulation to the backlash. The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest LGBTQ advocacy organization, suspended the company's Corporate Equality Index score, USA Today reported on Thursday. Previously, the company scored 100, the top rating.

"More and more people on the left are upset that the company is not supporting these progressive values in a more outspoken way," Frericks said.

The scale and longevity of the backlash also underscore the intensity of anti-trans sentiment among conservatives, experts said.

As of last week, more than 520 anti-LGBTQ bills had been introduced in state legislatures, including over 220 bills specifically targeting transgender and non-binary people, the Human Rights Campaign found.

Far-right House Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. last month reposted a video to her 700,000 followers that sharply criticized Bud Light. Celebrities like Kid Rock and Ted Nugent had previously voiced similar messages.

"This anti-woke agenda and the idea of trans rights broadly has become a wedge issue," Maurice Schweitzer, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business who studies consumer movements, told ABC News. "It has gained and attracted a great deal of attention."

Anheuser-Busch InBev stands in a difficult position as it faces frustration on both sides of the political spectrum, said Davis, of the University of Michigan.

"A dynamic has been set in motion that's going to be very complicated for the company to navigate," Davis said. "What stance could they take now that would make one side or the other say, 'Oh, OK'?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The boycott against Bud Light is hammering sales. Experts explain why.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sales of Bud Light have declined for six consecutive weeks, data showed.

# data[].attributes.body
This articles shows different celebrities reactions to the campaign.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kid Rock is seen in attendance during the UFC 287 event at Kaseya Center on April 8, 2023, in Miami. Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC via GI

As right-wing legislative attacks against queer and trans people continue to skyrocket around the country, some conservatives seem to only be talking about one thing as of late: Bud Light.

On April 1, transgender TikTok star and social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney shared a video of herself participating in Bud Light's Easy Carry Contest for the end of March Madness, revealing that the company helped her celebrate her "365th day of womanhood" with "possibly the best gift ever" - a commemorative can of Bud Light with Mulvaney's face emblazoned on the side.

While Anheuser-Busch (the company that makes Bud Light) originally told Billboard in a statement that the commemorative cans bearing Mulvaney's face are "not for sale," that didn't stop right-wing commentators from causing an uproar online, saying that the brand shouldn't be promoting transgender "ideologies." Some even said that they would be "boycotting" the companies many products, which include Budweiser, Busch, Stella Artois, Michelob Ultra, Hoegarden and others.

Some of those who spoke out included celebrities such as Kid Rock and Travis Tritt, who promised that they would be cutting all ties with the brand from that point forward. Other artists, including Jason Isbell and Zach Bryan, defended the brand against the online backlash, pointing out the importance of diversity. Even shock jock Howard Stern weighed in on the issue, saying he was "dumbfounded by why someone would care so much" about a trans person acting as a spokesperson for the beer brand.

All of this led to Anheuser-Busch CEO Brendan Whitworth releasing a statement where he attempted to cool the heated discourse, writing that the company "never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people. We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer." He added that in the future, he would personally "continue to work tirelessly to bring great beers to consumers across the nation."

See what artists have had to say about the ongoing Anheuser-Busch controversy below:

Get weekly rundowns straight to your inbox

Sign Up

One of the first artists to express his displeasure with Anheuser-Busch, Kid Rock decided to take his anger out with some help from an assault rifle. Posting a video across his social media on April 3, the self-proclaimed "Devil Without a Cause" said that he was "feeling a little frisky" and promised to be "as clear and concise as possible," before firing a series of rounds at three unopened cases of Bud Light, sending the drinks spraying across his lawn.

Making good on his promise of remaining "clear and concise," the "Cocky" singer yelled "f-k Bud Light, and f-k Anheuser-Busch" directly into the camera to close out his video.

After watching Kid Rock express himself through gunplay, country star Jason Isbell decided to take the rap-rocker to task through a series of tweets. Retweeting the rap-rocker's original video, Isbell mocked the clip, asking, "Is this one of those three words you wish you could say to your teenage self things." Later, retweeting an infographic that showed Coors Light's long history of corporate support for the LGBTQ community, the "Cover Me Up" singer said, "This is finally how we get him. Leave no bigoted beers to drink."

When a number of users tried to clap back at Isbell, he continued to taunt them, telling one fan who said "Kid Rock is 100 times a better musician than you" that "he can't shoot for s-t though can he."

As the backlash to the brand continued, country singer-songwriter Travis Tritt announced on Twitter on April 5 that he would be "deleting all Anheuser-Busch products from my tour hospitality rider," adding that there were "many other artists who are doing the same."

As for why those other artists didn't seem to be vocalizing their alleged boycott of the brand, Tritt theorized that their silence was due to "fear of being ridiculed and cancelled. I have no such fear." The "T-R-O-U-B-L-E" performer also added that while he went on a tour sponsored by the brand back in the '90s, he did so when they were "a great American company," before they apparently "sold out to the Europeans and became unrecognizable to the American consumer."

The "Here's a Quarter (Call Someone Who Cares)" singer didn't stop at Anheuser-Busch. Sharing an advertisement from Jack Daniel's promoting its own Pride campaign with drag stars from RuPaul's Drag Race, Tritt said that buyers "should take note."

In full disclosure, I was on a tour sponsored by Budweiser in the 90's. That was when Anheuser-Busch was American owned. A great American company that later sold out to the Europeans and became unrecognizable to the American consumer. Such a shame.
- Travis Tritt (@Travistritt) April 6, 2023

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

John Rich of country duo Big & Rich made it very clear that he would be one of the artists joining Tritt in his boycott of Anheuser-Busch's products. In an April 5 tweet, the "Save a Horse (Ride a Cowboy)" singer asked his fans, "What beer should my bar @rnrbarnash in Nashville replace #BudLight with," referring to his restaurant/bar Redneck Riviera. He also posted a poll on Twitter asking his followers if they were "thirsty for a Bud Light now," with the resounding response being "Hell Naw."

After Rich officially removed Bud Light from his Nashville bar, the singer appeared on Fox News to comment on Budweiser's pro-America ad it ran in the midst of the ongoing controversy. The singer called the apparent attempt at saving face from the beer brand "a little late," adding that bringing "political" issues into a brand was ill-advised. "You know, the American public, we're never left alone anymore. We literally can't go anywhere without something divisive or political being thrown into our face," he said. "They feel betrayed by it and they just can't believe that now when they're sitting down to relax and have a beer, at the end of the day, now it's in their face again. And I think they've just had enough of it."

With a handful of artists declaring that they would be boycotting Anheuser-Busch products, The Offspring's lead guitarist Noodles (born Kevin John Wasserman) announced that the band would be going in exactly the opposite direction. "We are going to be adding Anheiser-Busch products & Jack Daniels to our hospitality rider just to piss off a bunch of dimwitted bigots who fear what they don't understand," the guitarist wrote over a retweet of Tritt's original statement. "I know a s-t-ton of artists who feel exactly the same. (And we all drink A LOT)."

With more and more stars commenting on the ongoing backlash to Anheuser-Busch, Ted Nugent appeared on Newsmax April 6 to support of Kid Rock, saying he "trained" the singer appropriately, "because nothing says 'I love you' like a fully automatic MP5 and nine-millimeter blasting about 600 rounds per minute."

Shifting his focus to Anheuser-Busch, the "Cat Scratch Fever" singer said that he would "never allow" any Anheuser-Busch products "anywhere near my world," and called the company's work with Mulvaney was "the epitome of cultural deprivation."

Rising country superstar Zach Bryan came to the defense of the trans community on Twitter, attempting to diffuse the growing tension. "I mean no disrespect towards anyone specifically, I don't even mind @travistritt," he tweeted on April 8. "I just think insulting transgender people is completely wrong because we live in a country where we can all just be who we want to be It's a great day to be alive I thought." He added a shoutout where he told Tritt that "I love Jack Daniels (my dogs name) and I will drink enough for both of us I promise."

When some fans pointed to a recent incident where former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines was allegedly "physically assaulted" by a group of protestors supporting trans rights, Bryan quickly said he did not support any kind of violence. "I just have family transitioning and have blood to defend here," he wrote. "No one threaten me pls."

I mean no disrespect towards anyone specifically, I don't even mind @Travistritt.
I just think insulting transgender people is completely wrong because we live in a country where we can all just be who we want to be
It's a great day to be alive I thought
- Zach Bryan (@zachlanebryan) April 8, 2023

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Before Anheuser-Busch partnered up with Mulvaney for their Easy Carry contest, country singer Riley Green was an apparent supporter of their flagship beer. In his 2019 song "I Wish Grandpas Never Died," Green added a series of "wishes" to his list, including a wish that "coolers never run out of cold Bud Light." But during a performance opening for Luke Combs at Nissan Stadium in Nashville on Friday (April 14), the singer switched the lyric to wishing that "coolers never run out of cold Coors Light," as the audience cheered him on.

During a Saturday (April 15) show at Indian Mountain Ampitheater in Piedmont, Ala., country star Brantley Gilbert decided not to say "Bottoms Up" when a fan tossed him a Bud Light. In a video of the incident that was posted online, the singer looked directly at the can and then back at the crowd, before saying "f-k that" and smashing the beer on the ground. When a fan tossed the singer another beer in a silver can, he nodded in approval, tossing it back to his drummer and instructing him to "shotgun that son of a bitch."

The Grammy-winning musician told Billboard's Melinda Newman at the Billboard Country Live event on June 7 that he'll be serving " every brand of beer " at his Friends In Low Places Bar & Honky Tonk in Nashville. "We just are. It's not our decision to make. Our thing is this, if you [are let] into this house, love one another," he said. "If you're an a-hole, there are plenty of other places on lower Broadway."

He stood firmly by that decision on the June 12 livestream of Inside Studio G, addressing the backlash he's received from the likes of Matt Gaetz and John Rich. "Everybody's got their opinions," Brooks said. "But inclusiveness is always going to be me. I think diversity is the answer to the problems that are here and the problems that are coming. So I love diversity. All-inclusive, so all are welcome."

The country star added that selling Bud Light and Anheuser-Busch products makes good business sense. "I'm a bar owner now. Are we going to have the most popular beers in the thing? Yes. That's not our call if we don't or not. It's the patrons' call - the bosses, right?" he explained. "Bring 'em in there. If they don't want it, then I got to go to the distributor and say, 'Man, your stuff's not selling.' And then action gets taken."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Every Musician Who's Spoken About Anheuser-Busch's Trans-Inclusive Campaign: Kid Rock, Jason Isbell & More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Kid Rock shooting cases of Bud Light, to Zach Bryan condemning insults against transgender people, here's how artists are reacting to the company working with influencer Dylan Mulvaney.

# data[].attributes.body
This article also explains everything that happened with Bud Light and Dylan Mulvaney! It also states that two Bud Light executives are on leave following the incident.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A partnership between Bud Light and transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney sparked discussion about representation in the beer industry and a boycott from some conservative consumers.

Weeks later, the sole Instagram post that sparked the discoursecontinues to shake things up: At least two Bud Light marketing executives are on leave, Mulvaney said she's faced transphobic harassment, some bars are halting product sales, and an alt-right beer grift appears to be on pause before it even launched.

Here's what you need to know.

How did this all start?

In early April, Mulvaney posted a video of herself holding a custom Bud Light can with her face on it, which the company sent to help celebrate a year since beginning her transition. The can with Mulvaney's face is not for sale, but the company announced a forthcoming line of Pride-themed cans featuring different pronouns. The video was part of a partnership between Mulvaney and the brand and promoted a social media contest the beer brand was running.

Quickly, the video was met with both positive and negative feedback and evolved into a weeks-long messy spectacle.
" READ MORE: Even more details on Bud Light's partnership with Dylan Mulvaney and the backlash
Critics said the beer brand should "know its audience" and demanded Bud Light cut ties with Mulvaney and stop "going woke." Conservative figures, including Gov. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.) and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R., Ga.), and Fox News hosts called for boycotts. Kid Rock posted a video of himself shooting 12-packs with a submachine gun, and others filmed themselves destroying and dumping out cans.

Some bars stopped selling the beer - either citing similar anti-transbeliefs or not wanting to get political and spark arguments.

What has happened since then?

For days, Bud Light's social media stayed quiet. The company released a statement about the company's various partnerships.

But Mulvaney's supporters said they wanted something more direct as the starlet faced an influx of transphobic harassment.

On April 14, the company broke its social media silence with a statement from Anheuser-Busch CEO Brendan Whitworth. He said the company "never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people." Whitworth did not reference the boycott or Mulvaney.

Two Bud Light executives on leave

Two Bud Light marketing executives involved with the Mulvaney partnership are now on leave.

Last week, Bud Light vice president of marketing Alissa Heinerscheid's leave of absence was announced. Conservatives previously criticized Heinerscheid for a resurfaced podcast interview where she discussed moving Bud Light away from its "fratty" ties. The leave of absence was first reported by Beer Business Daily and Ad Age and confirmed by Anheuser-Busch.

By Monday, a second executive - Daniel Blake, who oversees marketing for Anheuser-Busch's large brands - was also placed on leave, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Previously, a debunked rumor was circulating that Anheuser-Busch laid off its entire marketing team because of the right-wing backlash. The Associated Press confirmed that wasn't the case.

Mulvaney speaks out

In her first major interview since the Bud Light backlash, Mulvaney spoke to the level of bullying the transgender community - and their allies - face.

"It's bullying in the fact that they want anyone who associates themselves with trans people to be under fire," she said on the April 11 episode of Onward with Rosie O'Donnell. "They want to essentially shame people into thinking that if you associate with someone like me, you are to be laughed at, and you are now the crazy one. Because you're 'giving in' to someone's identity, or just acknowledging their existence."

When asked why right-wing trolls are targeting her, Mulvaney called herself "an easy target" because she transitioned in the last year.

"I'm still new to this," she said. "Going after a trans woman that's been doing this for, like, 20 years is a lot more difficult. So I think maybe they think there's some sort of chance with me ... but what is their goal?"

Mulvaney went on to voice concerns regarding the number of anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ bills surfacing across the country.

"I'm just like, 'We just have to stay alive,'" she said. "This is the time, I think, for not only just everyday straight people, but we need every letter of the alphabet to show up for us - because I think it's all hands on deck."

Ultra Right Beer fails to get brewed

In response to Bud Light boycotts, a right-wing influencer attempted to launch his own anti-woke beer.

But, as noted by The Daily Dot, finding a contract brewer to make and distribute the beer has become a challenge.

Seth Weathers said he created Ultra Right beer to sell a product that doesn't "use our money to indoctrinate children with their woke garbage." A common anti-LGBTQ trope used among critics is likening queer people to "groomers" who are "indoctrinating youth." Weathers listed the six-packs for $19.99 plus shipping. A Bud Light six-pack sells on average for about $8.

Weathers apparently planned to contract the beer brewing to Illinois-based Bent River Brewing Company. The brewery said it was approached for the contract, but declined once owners found out what it was for. Still, as first reported by PorchDrinking.com, archives show Bent River was listed as the beer maker on Ultra Right's website.

For now, Ultra Right's website is still active and still says the beer is made in Illinois. But the shipping time has been pushed back - from the original "May 11 or thereabouts" to "approximately 30 days after order."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
At least two Bud Light executives are on leave after Dylan Mulvaney partnership blowback

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At least two Bud Light executives are on leave after a partnership between Bud Light and transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney sparked swift discourse - and backlash.

# data[].attributes.body
The below shows screenshots of backlash comments on the Bud Light Instagram page. I managed to screenshot these in time as they have all now been deleted! I will use these comments in my report.

# data[].attributes.body
This article has useful and relevant information for the section of my report, 'How Cancel Culture Effects Brands'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past few years, "cancel culture" has entered the mainstream lexicon, thanks to social media. Fast forward 2020, the term has become central to public debate across politics, culture and media. In short, cancel culture refers to the practice of withdrawing support for a person or company - often on social media - based on their views or actions.

The current pandemic has only served to increase the cultural impact of the internet on society. Ever since the physical world went into lockdown, people have been spending a record amount of time online. At the same time, social isolation has further facilitated online interaction. Thus, sparking a renewed wave of social activism amplified by the Black Lives Matter movement. All these factors combined, make cancellation one of the most contested issues of the decade. What's more, this is likely to be the start of an enduring battle to maintain or reshape the prevailing narrative through which we live our lives. A battle that is bound to have major implications for brands and marketers.

The case against cancel culture

Critics of cancel culture view the movement as a modern form of mob rule. Cancellation prevents open debate which has long been the foundation of democracy. After all, the ability to entertain different ideas and perspectives creates the conditions for social progress. Some of the greatest breakthroughs in human history have occurred when cultures have shared and exchanged contrary ideas. Whereas cancel culture can summarily execute opposing viewpoints without any due process or context.

The rise of the term's popularity has even mobilized 150 public figures to denounce the prevalence of cancel culture. Notable signatories include J.K Rowling, Salman Rushdie, Margarete Atwood, Malcolm Gladwell and Noam Chomsky. The open letter in Harper's magazine warns against a vogue culture of public shaming. It states, "The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted." The letter comes after J.K. Rowling was canceled on Twitter for a series of social media posts and essays described as "transphobic." Online cancel culture is accused of promoting cultural censorship as seen when HBO Max's removal of Gone with the Wind (recently returned with a disclaimer), Cops and Little Britain. Many film critics argue that old content shouldn't be deleted but understood within the context of that particular time in history. If we simply cancel all art considered offensive through the lens of modernity: what would we be left with? And is it possible to separate the art from the artist? If not, what happens to the works of Mark Twain, Rudyard Kipling, Richard Wagner, John Wayne and many more.

The case for cancel culture

In contrast, supporters view cancel culture as an important tool in achieving social justice. The internet, in particular, social media provides a platform for the historically underserved to share their views, opinions and lived experiences. In many ways, Twitter offers an outlet for groups excluded from traditional institutions - such as politics, education, economy and media - to have a say. Today, marginalized groups are no longer solely reliant on prejudiced establishments built for the privileged few. Every citizen with access to the internet can now write an opinion piece, share their story and speak truth to power. A single Tweet has the power to plummet share prices, hold politicians accountable and force celebrities to admit to wrongdoings. Put another way, cancel culture represents the voice of the voiceless.

But there's also a deeper layer of social, cultural and historical context that can be applied to the cancel culture debate. It could be argued that cancel culture doesn't actually exist. Instead, the term has become a convenient red herring to silence legitimate protests and maintain the status quo. From this perspective, what we're seeing is an authentic attempt to right historical wrongs and push for meaningful change. For example, so-called cancel culture was instrumental in making the #MeToo campaign go mainstream. Making sure that #BlackLivesMatter has been used on Twitter and Instagram since 2014. And rallying millions of people globally to protest against climate change. It could be argued, cancel culture is a synonym for legitimate criticism from groups - who until recently - lacked the means to express themselves.

What it all means for brands

More recently, the cancel culture debate has spilled over into the world of marketing and advertising. Historically, brands have stayed out of politics - for good reason - taking sides can alienate a large chunk of their customer base. But in today's increasingly polarised climate, not taking sides can be the bigger risk. Brands can no longer afford to remain neutral because neutral is viewed as complicit. That being said, empty statements of solidarity no longer suffice either. The consumers of today are more informed and empowered than ever before. They expect you to turn your words into action. And if brands don't stick to their promises, consumers possess the knowledge, determination and platform to call them out. In short, there's nowhere to hide.

According to a study by Edelman, 64% of consumers around the world will buy or boycott a brand solely because of its position on a social or political issue. Only a few years ago, the term boycott was viewed as something confined to the radical fringes of society. But today, boycotting has become a mainstream consumer reaction. And it's not only directed towards socially irresponsible brands. But also, towards brands seen to be overplaying their social and environmental credentials. For example, Swedish vegan milk brand Oatly has long been a favorite for eco-friendly consumers. However, fans of the alternative milk brand have started boycotting the company after it sold $200 million in shares to a consortium that includes Blackstone following a Twitter thread accusing the investor of contributing to deforestation in the Amazon. Similarly, Lululemon has been under fire for promoting an event about "decolonizing gender" and how to "resist capitalism" despite the companies $45 billion market valuation.

Although consumers are increasingly demanding brands to take a stand. It's equally important to remember, 56% believe too many brands use societal issues as a marketing ploy to sell more of their product. In the race to reflect societal values, brands are becoming ever more reactive, but doing so can lead to consumer backlash unless the sentiment is backed by authentic action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Brands Need To Pay Attention To Cancel Culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Online cancel culture has become of the most contested issues of the decade. The battle to maintain or reshape social norms will have major implications for brands and marketers.

# data[].attributes.body
This article will help me link 'Cancel Culture' to Gen Z consumers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Generation Z has a bad case of the "yips", according to a new label being applied to a swathe of 13- to 24-year-olds.

Close to half of those surveyed from that age range, branded young illiberal progressives (yips), think some people deserve to be "cancelled", compared with a third of over-25s, and more than a quarter say they have "very little tolerance for people with beliefs I disagree with", new research by Channel 4 shows.

Yet at the same time, the study found they are significantly more progressive than older generations on issues such as gender and multiculturalism.

Generation Z, about 7 million strong, is the youngest generation charted in detail by researchers, with the so-called Generation Alpha mostly still at primary school. Their experience has been shaped in recent years by school and university being thrown into disarray by Covid and by the rise of social media, which has been ubiquitous since their adolescence or earlier.

Attempts to understand them are gathering pace as they head into adulthood and become more powerful consumers and start to vote. Separate research earlier this year found 60% of 18- to 24-year-olds agree that having a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament or elections is a good way to run the country, more than double the number in 2017.

The paradox between tolerance and the urge to "cancel" may be "mystifying", said Alex Mahon, the chief executive of Channel 4, as she unveiled the broadcaster's analysis of "the most misjudged group of people in our recent history". But, she said, it was likely to be "a completely rational response to the online world we have".

"Young people could be said to be less liberal because they are less tolerant of the views of others than their parents and grandparents - surely a novelty," she said.

When asked about the findings, Holly Valler, 18, told the Guardian: "Cancel culture has become something where you use it for everything. We just cancel people for the sake of wanting [to set] a trend going and to have some drama."

"I am seeing people cancelled for things they did when they were 15 years old," said Ruben Otakoya, 19. "It's out of order."

Georgia, 22, added: "People my age have been subconsciously pushed into a box where they think that the only way to share their opinion is by convincing other people that their opinion is the only correct way ... They are confident ... because now you can Google something and have facts that back up your opinion ... I don't necessarily blame our generation for being illiberal. I almost blame the environment that we're in that has caused us to be so confirmed in our thoughts."

The study of more than 1,500 people also revealed a generational gulf between how stressed Gen Z is about social media and the risks perceived by older people. It found Instagram, TikTok and other channels were not even in the top five stated sources of stress. Those were concerns held by generations for centuries: the cost of living, a lack of affordable housing, uncertainty about the future, pressure to be successful and worries about their appearance.

Well over half (58%) think older generations worry too much and exaggerate the effects of social media. Just over a third of Gen Z view social media as a source of stress, while more than half say the positives outweigh the negatives. A fifth have paused social media use to protect their mental health and one in nine have given it up permanently.

In a sign of continuing evolving norms, Amelia Sumner, 24, told the Guardian she was now worried about a young family member posting sexually suggestive videos to TikTok and Otakoya said he was concerned to see a young family member posting a twerking film.

The study also found high levels of "little picture" hope, with 60% optimistic about their futures and a similar number feeling empowered to influence that future, while only a third were optimistic about the future of the world.

Prof Bobby Duffy, the director of the Policy Institute at King's College London, questioned whether Gen Z would remain illiberal as it aged. "You do have greater certainty that your worldview is correct [when young]," he said. "And then it gets more complex and nuanced as you get older. So there's likely to be a lifecycle element to that."

He added: "It is a different environment that young people are living in, where the type of responses that you can get given through social media to sharing people's views, and then the reactions to that ... just provides a very different context.

"Whether this is a truly illiberal generation I think is unclear, but it is worth watching."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'It's out of order': Gen Z speak up for cancel culture and 'young illiberal progressives'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Channel 4 study reveals 13- to 24-year-olds are paradox of progressive attitudes and intolerance for others' points of view

# data[].attributes.body
The mental health effects of cancel culture!

A 2020 survey conducted by Pew Research Center highlights the controversy surrounding cancel culture. While 38% of people say that calling someone out on social media punishes those who don't deserve it, 58% feel that it helps hold people accountable for their actions. (Tuler, 2022)

https://www.verywellmind.com/the-mental-health-effects-of-cancel-culture-5119201

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Cancel Culture?

Cancel culture is a form of boycott. It is the removal or "canceling" of a person, organization, product, brand, or anything else due to an issue that a community or group disapproves of or finds offensive.

One definition of cancel culture is "the popular practice of withdrawing support for...public figures and companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable or offensive." This canceling is often "performed on social media in the form of group shaming."

In short, to be canceled means that a person or group decides to stop supporting someone or something based on a transgression that is either actual or perceived.

Call-Out Culture vs. Cancel Culture

Origin of Cancel Culture

Although canceling is often used in response to sexist behavior, the term itself appears to originate from sexist humor. One of the earliest references came from the 1991 film New Jack City. Nino Brown (played by Wesley Snipes), referring to a girlfriend, mercilessly states, "Cancel that [expletive]. I'll buy another one."

The term gained traction in 2014 thanks to an episode of VH1's reality show Love and Hip-Hop: New York. In this episode, music executive and record producer Cisco Rosado ended an argument with his girlfriend by saying, "You're canceled."

In earlier days, the word "cancel" was often used on social media as a way for a person who was part of the Black LGBTQ+ community to show disapproval of another person's actions. It wasn't until later that canceling someone involved boycotting them professionally.

Reasons for Canceling

Some of the top reasons cited for canceling include:

To serve as a teaching moment

To get the person to consider the consequences of their statements

To expose racism or sexism

To get people to think before they speak

To hold someone accountable for their statements or behaviors

Cancel Culture Examples

Some examples of cancel culture include:

J.K. Rowling, the author of Harry Potter, was canceled after making a comment on Twitter in June of 2020 that offended some members of the transgender community. The tweet in question was retweeted over 95,000 times and drew more than 46,000 comments.

Mike Lindell, the CEO of MyPillow, was canceled in 2021 after supporting the claims of voter fraud against former President Donald Trump. At least two banks joined in on the canceling in 2022 after phone call recordings were subpoenaed by the January 6 House select committee, ultimately telling Lindell to "leave their bank" as he was a "reputation risk."

Chrissy Teigen, a model and bestselling cookbook author, was also canceled in 2021 after several people exposed her for sending "mean tweets," ultimately causing Teigen to step away from her cleaning supplies company and be replaced by Netflix in the second season of "Never Have I Ever."

Positive Impact of Cancel Culture

Cancel culture can help combat wrongdoings and address inequalities. In 2016, for example, many members of the film community boycotted the Oscars because of the lack of diversity among nominees. This helped promote social change and, in 2019, the Oscars set a record for the most nominations for Black directors ever.

A community that unites for a common cause can be empowering. It can also make people think twice before behaving inappropriately or posting potentially offensive thoughts and opinions.

Mental Health Effects of Cancel Culture

There are also negative effects of cancel culture, some of which are related to mental health. The impact of cancel culture on mental health depends on whether you are the one being canceled, the canceler, or a bystander.

Effects on the Canceled

Unfortunately, canceling often turns into bullying. Like bullying, if you've been canceled, you may feel ostracized, socially isolated, and lonely. And research shows that loneliness is associated with higher anxiety, depression, and suicide rates.

If you are canceled, it can also feel as if everyone is giving up on you before you've even had the chance to apologize (let alone change your behavior). Instead of creating a dialogue to help you understand how your actions hurt others, the cancelers shut off all communication, essentially robbing you of the opportunity to learn and grow from your mistakes.

Effects on the Canceler

You have the right to set your own boundaries and to decide what uplifts and what offends you. You also have the right to decide to whom and what you give your attention, money, and support.

But canceling the offending person (or brand) doesn't always cause them to change their beliefs or lead to lasting change. It can even make them dig in their heels in an effort to defend their ego and reputation.

In some cases, canceling has the opposite effect of what was desired. One example is the docuseries "Surviving R. Kelly." While this TV series prompted many to push for a sex crimes conviction against the musician, it also created a 126% increase in on-demand streams of Kelly's music the day after the premiere.

Effects on the Bystander

Cancel culture doesn't just affect the canceled and the cancelers. It can also wreak havoc on onlookers' mental health.

After seeing so many people being canceled, some bystanders are plagued with fear. They become overwhelmed with anxiety that people will turn on them if they fully express themselves. This can cause them to keep their thoughts bottled up instead of talking about and working through their opinions and emotions.

Bystanders might also worry that others will find something in their pasts to use against them. Or they may fear that every word they say or write is going to be examined under a microscope and construed as offensive, even if it wasn't meant to be.

So, instead of saying how they feel about an event or situation, bystanders may choose to remain silent. This can lead them to be weighed down with guilt long after the event or situation has passed-guilt for not standing up for someone else when they had the chance.

How to Protect Your Mental Health

Though you can't control how others behave, you can control your own behavior (as well as how you respond to negativity). Here are some actions you can take to help protect your mental health with regard to cancel culture:

Avoid posting when your emotions are heightened. Try not to post when you're feeling overly emotional. If someone says or does something that pushes your buttons, don't rush to your keyboard. Instead, take a few deep breaths and give yourself time to calm down. While you may forget what you said or wrote a day, week, or month from now, the internet never forgets.

Have others review your post first. Sometimes it's hard to recognize when our own words may come across as offensive or aggressive. Having someone else review your posts first can help bring any potential issues to your attention. This gives you the opportunity to avoid sharing thoughts or opinions that could inadvertently hurt someone else.

If you were wrong, apologize. If you were canceled for saying or doing something and now feel bad about it, apologize. But before you do, give yourself time to craft a genuine, well-thought-out response (this also gives time for the attention to die down). Then, when you're ready, share your apology. It might not be accepted by everyone. But if it's from the heart, some people will recognize this and allow it to soften their views of you-or at least reduce their desire to make you their top public enemy.

Try to see the other side. If someone speaks out against you, your first reaction may be to dig in and stand your ground. However, you may get further by trying to truly understand how your words or actions may have hurt or offended someone else. Gaining this understanding can bridge the communication gap. It can also help keep you from making the same mistake again.

Spend less time online. It's okay to take a break from social media. Unplugging every now and then may help improve your mental health. One study found that cutting back on social media use decreases loneliness and depression.

Talk to someone. If you're experiencing cancel culture firsthand and are not sure how to recover, consider reaching out to someone you trust, such as a family member or close friend. If you're not comfortable talking to someone you know, you can also seek professional help. Having someone to confide in can make a huge difference in the way you feel.

Can You Avoid Being Canceled?

Consider that everyone has different backgrounds, experiences, and beliefs. Although yours have caused you to view the world one way, not everyone has that same view. Being aware of this (and open-minded) can help keep you from saying or doing something that makes you a target.

It's also helpful to remember that you don't have to intend to be offensive in order to offend. Perception becomes reality, so if someone perceives your words or actions as offensive, it doesn't matter what you intended. The damage is done.

So, instead of trying to convince others that you didn't mean to offend them, recognize that they are offended and work to find ways to move forward. Learn from the experience and use it to help you become a stronger, more caring, and empathetic person.

A Word From Verywell

Some aspects of cancel culture can be useful in holding people and organizations accountable for bad behavior. On the flip side, it can take bullying to a new level, damaging the mental well-being of everyone involved.

The key to overcoming any sort of ostracism or rejection is to not allow the things that are said or done to define who you are as a person. And don't be afraid to reach out for help. Having someone in your corner can help you feel more connected and less alone.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cancel Culture and Its Mental Health Effects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is cancel culture? Learn more about how cancel culture has evolved in our society, and how it impacts our mental health.

# data[].attributes.body
This article has great information about 'Cancel Culture' as a whole.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why we can’t stop fighting about cancel culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is cancel culture a mob mentality, or a long overdue way of speaking truth to power?

# data[].attributes.body
This article has useful and relevant information for the section of my report, 'How Cancel Culture Effects Brands'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Media Garage Group - Boutique Advertising & Marketing Agency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At this point in history, we're all very much aware of how culture can change at the speed of the Internet. And as long as you're a public-facing entity, you're fair game for scrutiny. Often, this scrutiny results in a person, brand, or organization getting "canceled." (Sure, I could've spelled it "cancelled," but I find the second "l" superfluous.) Cancel culture is as pervasive today as " Rickrolling" was in 2008. If one has Internet access, one has the power to "cancel." In fact, in 2019, while speaking at the Obama Foundation Summit, former president Barack Obama had some thoughts on the issue:

"The cancel culture is predicated on this idea of purity; the illusion that you've never compromised and you're always politically 'woke' and all that stuff."

He continued, "You should get over that quickly. The world is messy, there are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws. People who you are fighting may love their kids and share certain things with you."

Every single person-living or dead-has made a mistake. Probably many. To err is human, after all. However, when it comes to brands and organizations, people expect perfect execution. So before we dive into the concept of cancel culture in advertising and marketing, let's begin with a working definition so we're all on the same page.

DEFINITION OF "CANCEL CULTURE"

It began with " call-out culture." Those were the good 'ol days when public humiliation was the worst-case scenario. This cultural phenomena usually entailed an individual or group "calling out" another individual or group-typically on social media-for problematic actions or statements.

Although similar to call-out culture, "cancel culture" takes the intensity up a few notches. Typically, the scenario plays out with a well-known figure publicly sharing a questionable, unpopular, or insensitive opinion, the public taking notice and reacting, and then the figure being subsequently "canceled"-boycotted-by her/his/their followers, supporters, sponsors, and the general public.

While call-out culture may include general outrage against a perceived offender, cancel culture may cause said offender to lose her/his/their livelihood. Cancelers often seek to financially harm the accused. This typically manifests as a demand for some form of punishment: the accused loses a job/position, power, influence, career opportunities, and endorsements. Cancel culture impacts entities such as comedians, actors, musicians, companies and brands, and even artistic expressions like songs and film.

According to , cancel culture, in short, refers to the practice of withdrawing support for a person or company-often on social media-based on their views or actions .

THE CULTURAL IMPACT OF THE INTERNET

When the world shut down for a year-and-a-half due to the COVID-19 pandemic, most people became more active online. Humans are tribal creatures, so it's only natural to look for community wherever it's accessible. Social isolation, therefore, facilitated more online interaction. During this time, and on the heels of the #MeToo movement, the Black Lives Matter movement sparked a renewed wave of social activism. With so much of life restricted by COVID protocol, people were hungry to make meaningful change and be a part of something larger than themselves. People were ready to talk, and listen, and talk some more.

But people have always talked. People withdrawing support from individuals, groups, or organizations once discovering they said or did something contradictory to the "values" they claim has always happened. However, what was once restricted to comment cards and letters to the editor is now Facebook updates, tweets, Instagram posts, Yelp reviews, TikTok videos, and YouTube comments. Social media has turned disagreements into calls-to-action: if someone with a social media account ( 70 percent of the U.S. population) discovers that a public entity said or did something that doesn't sit right with her/him/them, they often urge other members of their communities to "cancel" the offending entity.

We no longer live in a world where we can't pay attention-particularly post-lockdown. We've spent a lot of time online in the past couple of years, so it's only natural that we're more keen to the words and actions of businesses, their executives, and the people with whom they associate.

The explosion and proliferation of social media has given power to the masses to share their opinions about brands-and sway others' opinions in the process-but 73% of those surveyed said they're less likely to cancel a purpose-driven brand.
Study: No Brand Is Immune to Cancel Culture, But Purpose Helps

THE ROLE OF CANCEL CULTURE IN ADVERTISING & MARKETING

Historically speaking, brands have stayed out of politics. They believed that if they became politically involved-particularly with regard to a divisive issue-they could potentially alienate a large chunk of their customer base. But the times, they are a-changin'.

Brands in today's marketplace can no longer afford to remain neutral about the issues plaguing modern consumers. Because neutral is perceived as complicit-and complicit is a death sentence. In today's increasingly polarized political and social climate, not taking a side or a stand can be a bigger risk than alienating certain members of your customer base. If modern brands don't adhere to their promises and "walk the walk" with regard to their mission or vision statements, consumers possess the knowledge, determination, and platforms to share this information with anyone who will listen (er, read).

"Owning and managing a brand in the age of social media is a chaotic and fast-paced responsibility." Jessica Vittorio, Managing Attorney at a Dallas-based law firm that provides counsel to startups and business owners

The majority of people on social media live a carefully curated online existence. Millennials and Gen-Z spend a higher proportion of time online than their older peers, so it has become commonplace for these generations to meticulously select every detail of their outward-facing social "personas"-it also means that many of them indulge in virtue signalling, and encourage a *very specific* strain of "wokeness" among friends, followers, and even business or brand accounts. However, the idea of being "woke" means different things to different people, so it's essentially guaranteed that mistakes will be made. Businesses and brands are comprised of humans, and humans are fallible. Further, businesses and brands are being held to-let's get real-often "performative" standards that no amount of awareness or eggshell-walking can help them live up to. They can't be all things to all people.

According to a 2021 Porter Novelli study, no brand is excluded from cancel culture, even those with loyal fans. Among those surveyed:

66% of people say even if they love a company's products or services, they will still "cancel" a company if it does something wrong or offensive.

CONSUMER REACTION MIGHT SURPRISE YOU

In a 2018 study, Global communications firm, Edelman, found that two-thirds of consumers worldwide now buy based on beliefs.

However, the same study found that 56% of consumers believe too many brands "use societal issues as a marketing ploy to sell more of their product." Cancel culture is not always directed at outwardly irresponsible brands, but also toward brands perceived to be " overplaying their social and environmental credentials."

Swedish vegan milk brand Oatly, for example, has always been a favorite of eco-friendly consumers (and this writer) for their sustainable practices. However, in September 2020, fans of the brand began boycotting the company after learning via a Twitter thread that it sold $200 million shares to a consortium that includes Blackstone, an investment firm that has been accused of contributing to deforestation in the Amazon.

HOW TO NAVIGATE YOUR BRAND THROUGH CANCEL CULTURE

As the old adage goes, "reputation is everything," and no one feels this more than brands trying to manage, sustain, and continuously engage their consumer base under the increasingly vigilant eye of social media and the 24-hour news cycle.

So if you've come here for cut-and-dry answers, you've come to the wrong place. Because there are no clear answers to this modern dilemma. It's easy to say, "Just do the right thing!" But at this point in history, what seems like the "right thing" externally may have negative or unethical implications behind the scenes. There's no surefire way to protect businesses and brands from getting "canceled"-especially if said business or brand employs many people; each with her/his/their own musings and belief systems. It's just not sustainable (or pleasant) for one's higher-ups to micromanage on this type of person-to-person level.

CONTROL WHAT YOU CAN

As individuals, we only have the power to control our own thoughts, actions, and reactions to others. So that's what we must focus on. As passive as this may seem, we just have to have a little faith in our fellow humans to make good decisions. If I can't remember what I ate for dinner two nights ago, I certainly can't remember something I may have said in passing 10 years ago. And sure, social media makes it much easier to keep "receipts," but isn't part of being a "progressive" society realizing that mistakes happen, and practicing a little forgiveness? Societal mores change. Hell, I was only able to legally marry my wife six years ago. Let that sink in. That's only half as long as " The Big Bang Theory " was on the air. That's only a "four lost teeth" amount of time for an average child. That's one digit more than being able to count the years on one hand. And let's not forget that prominent "liberal" figures were not always so supportive of LGBTQ+ rights. But we grow, and adapt, and evolve-and part of that is admitting when we were wrong and making amends.

REALIZE THAT NOT ALL CANCELLATIONS ARE CREATED EQUAL

The words and actions of Kevin Hart are not the same as the words and actions of Harvey Weinstein. Neither of which are even in the same ballpark as those criticizing the toy formerly known as "Mr. Potato Head" and the removal of content from Dr. Seuss's collection.

In Kevin Hart's case, he tweeted some unsavory things about the LGBTQ+ community in 2009 and 2011. Let's remember a few things:

Kevin Hart is a comic; he jokes for a living

He apologized for what he wrote nearly a decade prior

See my previous point about gay marriage only becoming legalized in 2015

In Harvey Weinstein's case, he used his power and influence to sexually harass and assault young women for 20+ years. He did severe psychological (and potentially physical) damage to countless impressionable women who were desperate to get a foot in Hollywood's door.

The severity of these offenses is very different. I know a certain Jewish carpenter who *may* disagree, but in the case of cancel culture, not all sins are the same.

Then there's the backlash from those perpetuating that the "cancel culture" narrative is for the weak. These types of people condemn Hasbro for demonstrating inclusivity by dropping the "Mr." in their "Potato Head" toy. Many of these same people are up-in-arms about Dr. Seuss's estate removing six books with racially insensitive content from his collection. Ironically, the Venn diagram for the "cancel culture is for weak" people and the "I'm going to boycott Nike or the NFL because one of its players put his entire career on the line to stand up for what's right" people is essentially a perfect circle.

DETERMINE A SET OF VALUES AND STICK BY THEM

Sure, it would be lovely if everyone was thoughtful, and true equality existed, and TSA didn't pat me down nearly every time I go through security because they enter my gender as male in the x-ray machine and my bra's metal clasp sets off an alarm, but it's just not in the cards for us. Until we expand our circles to include people, and opinions, that differ from our own, cancellations will continue. Because once we can empathize with, and understand, those who look/act/talk/believe differently than we do, we will be less likely to say or do something that may hurt them in the first place.

Then again, if your brand is based on these very differences (e.g., "male" vs. "female" products), you may need to fully lean in. However, you can have pride in who you are and how you identify without purposely offending anyone. With the exception of those restaurants where the serving staff is mean to you "for fun," I can't think of a single successful brand that has a mission to hurt or offend people.

So stand up for what you believe in, support your brand's mission, but do so knowing that there's absolutely no way to make everyone happy all the time. And that's okay.

BE PROACTIVE

Being proactive goes beyond having a disaster plan. Yes, businesses and brands should have a plan to best respond to backlash if it were to occur: rather than feverishly deleting offensive social media posts, make sure management is prepared to speak to, and most likely apologize for, whatever incident may have occurred. However, holding a press conference or releasing a well-prepared statement is more "reactive" than "proactive."

Instead, consider the following:

Ensure diverse hiring practices in every sense of the word: race, religion, gender identity, body type, etc. If you really want your product or service to speak to the masses, you have to have a sense of what the "masses" look/feel/sound/act like. And although you surely have a "target audience," you're not just "selling" to a homogeneous group.

Forge quality partnerships: by aligning your brand with others that have similar values, you're making a public statement that you're committed to the cause (even if that cause is celebrating the androgyny of an anthropomorphized potato).

Lead with your actions: they really do speak louder than words. Build great products, offer stellar services, "walk the walk"-that way, even if you happen to make a social mistake, your intentions and the quality of your brand will win out in the end.

Don't confuse compliance with leadership: bowing to your accusers is not the same as taking a stand. Performative activism is not real activism.

As former president Obama stated, "The world is messy, there are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws." And who are any of us to believe that we're not flawed (the pathologically delusional, I suppose). Businesses and brands are made up of humans, and humans are inherently faulty-we can't get away from it. But what we can do is try our best.

If companies commit to this-trying to create the best products and services possible, trying to hire the best people, trying to communicate openly and empathetically-that's all consumers could ask for. When a company has a transparent culture, everyone benefits-just ask Patagonia, Warby Parker, or Zappos. In the case of "cancel culture," transparency could simply mean admitting fault, or apologizing when wrong, or even going the opposite direction and taking a firmer stance on specific hot-button issues, but explaining the reasoning behind the position. Because at the end of the day-no matter the issue-all people want is to be seen, heard, and understood.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NAVIGATING A BRAND THROUGH CANCEL CULTURE IN ADVERTISING & MARKETING

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Discover the cultural impact of the Internet and how to navigate your brand through cancel culture in advertising and marketing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Inside Marketing- Social Media & the impact of cancel culture on brands.

# data[].attributes.subject
Inside Marketing- Social Media & the impact of cancel culture on brands.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Should we understand 'cancel culture'?

# data[].attributes.subject
How Should we understand 'cancel culture'?

# data[].attributes.headline
'Cancelled' The Left Way Back From Woke.

# data[].attributes.subject
'Cancelled' The Left Way Back From Woke.

# data[].attributes.headline
Cancel This Book- The Progressive Case Against Cancel Culture

# data[].attributes.subject
Cancel This Book- The Progressive Case Against Cancel Culture

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out to Bria Jones on Instagram DM and Email, who released a video about how she was excluded from activities on the Tarte Brand trip but she didn't respond.

# data[].attributes.body
For Bud Light to increase revenue within its digital direct-to-consumer ecosystem (website) by 7% to 481,500,000 within the next 12 months.

# data[].attributes.body
Bud Light's online revenue for 2022 was 450 million (ABInBev, 2023).
I will increase this by 7% in the next 12 months to make a new online revenue of $481,500,00.

$481,500,000 divided by $30 (AOV) = 16,050,000 (the number of transactions needed to meet the new revenue.

16,050,00 x 500 (Conversion Rate) = 8,025,000,000

7,383,000,000 is the total number of unique site visitors.

# data[].attributes.body
For Bud Light to convert 5% of their site visitors (14,284,500) at an AOV of $30 (where did I get that number from.com) within the next 12 months.

Conversion will account for 89% of the overall revenue objective ($428,535,000).

$428,535,000 / $30 = 14,284,500
(converted site visitors)

# data[].attributes.body
For Bud Light to acquire 178,556,250 million unique site visitors within the next 12 months.

14,284,500 (Conversion Objective) X 12.5  = 178,556,250 (Acquisition Objective.)

12.5 is the amount of 8's that goes into 100.

# data[].attributes.body
For Bud Light to retain 11% of their converted customers (1,765,500) at an AOV of $30 within the next 12 months.

Retention will account for 11% ($52,965,000) of the overall revenue.

52,965,000 / 30 = 1,765,500 (retention objective)

# data[].attributes.body
4.6%

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global conversion rate by industry 2022 | Statista

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Online conversion rates of e-commerce sites were the highest in the food and beverage sector, at 4.6 percent in the last quarter of 2022.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BUD/anheuser-busch/revenue

For 2022, Anheuser-Busch revenue for the twelve months ending March 31, 2022 was $58.764 Billion a 6.37% increase year-over-year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anheuser-Busch Revenue 2010-2023 | BUD

Anheuser-Busch InBev is a global brewing company with more than 500 iconic brands. Anheuser-Busch InBev is one of the biggest brewing companies (by volume), also ranking among the top five consumer product firms. Following the acquisition of SABMiller in October 2016, the company holds the top spot in the beer industry, controlling about one-third of the global beer market .The company's diverse portfolio includes global brands like Budweiser, Corona and Stella Artois; multi-country brands like Beck's, Hoegaarden, Leffe and Michelob Ultra; and local names like Aguila, Antarctica, Bud Light, Brahma, Cass, Castle, Castle Lite, Cristal, Harbin, Jupiler, Modelo Especial, Quilmes, Victoria, Sedrin, and Skol.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anheuser-Busch annual/quarterly revenue history and growth rate from 2010 to 2023. Revenue can be defined as the amount of money a company receives from its customers in exchange for the sales of goods or services. Revenue is the top line item on an income statement from which all costs and expenses are subtracted to arrive at net income.

# data[].attributes.body
$23

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We've conducted studies analyzing spending habits by age and gender. We have noted that women spend slightly more than men, and that 41- to 45-year-olds spend the most. But what impact does the size of a party have on the amount a guest spends while visiting a brewery?

Through a Secret Hopper study consisting of 5,700 unique, non-paid brewery visits we dug into data on spending habits by party size. The average party in the sample was 3.13 guests, and the median party size was two guests. The average party spent $43.42, with the average check covering 1.94 guests. While this data is all fine and dandy, does a person in a smaller or larger party spend more and why?

Spending per guest, per party size

Solo guests accounted for 10.8 percent of total brewery visits in our sample. A guest visiting a brewery alone spent an average of $29.90.

Guests visited as a party of two 45.6 percent of the time. The average person in a party of two spent $22.70. This is 31.7 percent less per person than what a single guest spent.

The party of three accounts for 15.5 percent of brewery visits. The average person in a party of three spends $22.12. The average person in a party of four, accounting for 12.8 percent of total visits, spent $22.69. The average person in a party of five spends $22.55, accounting for 5.2 percent of brewery visits. The average person in a party of six, which account for 3.9 percent of visits, spent $23.81.

Lastly, guests in parties of seven and above spent an average of $21.11, accounting for 6.2 percent of total brewery visits.

Why might a single guest spend more?

Regarding a party of one, it can be argued that the amount the guest spends is influenced by fewer outside factors. When more guests are part of a group, they equate to contributing factors that can encourage, or discourage, a person to spend more.

A single guest can also be given more one-on-one attention from brewery staff. This can influence them to spend more. In larger parties, brewery staff is dividing their attention between more people. The data supports this hypothesis.

Let's take a look at the amount a guest spends in relation to the level of engagement they received.

We define the levels engagements as the following:

Low: The staff does not attempt to build a connection with the guest and is absent for the bulk of the guest's visit.

Neutral: The staff goes through the motions, neither impressing or disappointing the guest.

Moderate: The staff greets the guest, offers recommendations and checks back in a timely fashion.

High: The staff goes above and beyond moderate, wowing the guest.

Single guests receive high engagement 48.7 percent of the time. Guests in parties of two receive high engagement 42.4 percent of the time, 6.3 percent less.

As the party size increases, the likelihood of the guest receiving high engagement decreases.

Interestingly enough, single shoppers are also the most likely to receive low engagement, at 6.5 percent of the time, albeit barely greater than the likelihood of larger parties to receiving low engagement.

Single guests are the least likely to receive neutral engagement. Parties of two receive neutral engagement 15.6 percent of the time and parties of three stand at 15 percent. Once we increase past three guests, the likelihood of receiving neutral engagement increases along with the party size.

With regard to moderate engagement, single guests are least likely to receive this, at 32 percent of the time. All greater party sizes stay close together, receiving moderate engagement between 36.2 percent (party of two) to 39 percent (party of six) of the time.

While a server may check back frequently on a larger party, this does not always translate to engagement. Additional touch points are a great way to offer high-quality service, but engagement is going above and beyond to build a personal connection.

Staff should seek to create the right relationship with each guest, no matter the party size they fall in. This can be achieved by tactics such as the 30 Second Conversation. Extra staff on hand, especially during busy shifts, can also help increase the level of engagement offered, creating a lower staff to guest ratio. Instead of just slinging drinks to a full bar, bring an extra hand on to serve connections. Learning to offer the ideal level of engagement to parties, both small and large, will help your brewery to better build relationships. Relationships are the difference from having a good beer and having a great experience.

Andrew Coplon is the Founder of Secret Hopper, a mystery shopping company for craft beer businesses, and Craft Beer Professionals, a community dedicated to the growth and betterment of the craft beer industry. Check out all of his CBB articles here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How party size influences spending per customer at a craft brewery

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We've conducted studies analyzing spending habits by age and gender. We have noted that women spend slightly more than men, and that 41- to 45-year-olds spend the most. But what impact does the size of a party have on the amount a guest spends while visiting a brewery?

# data[].attributes.body
This is my overall SMART planning doc that I completed on week 1 of the project. This is a rough outline as it will change as I go through my project.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, specifically looking at Research. This will help me keep on track of what research I have completed and when.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, specifically looking at Analyse. This will help me keep on track of what analyse I need to complete and when.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, specifically looking at Production.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, specifically looking at Conceptual Development.

# data[].attributes.body
I reached out to retail consultant and founder of Retail Reflections, Andrew Busby on LinkedIn and then email as he had wrote a piece of the Bud Light x Dylan Mulvaney situation.

He thoroughly answered some questions for me via email. You can find the full interview in the appendix of my report.

# data[].attributes.body
This article will allow me to see what the benefits of cancel culture are and include in my report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cancel culture is a beneficial and necessary part of modern media. Unfortunately though, it is often met with contention as it is regarded as a way to publicly shame people for mistakes. It is considered toxic in how it focuses simply on ending a person's career rather than fixing the mistake they were called out for. However, cancel culture serves a greater purpose in modern media as it encourages the public to voice their distaste with celebrities and influencers who often feel untouchable. Thus, those people who have gone unaccountable have a new opportunity to address their mistakes.

While the precise origin of cancel culture is unknown, an era of addressing public figure's wrongdoings has been prevalent through social media for many years. For example, the #MeToo movement went viral in 2017, with assault survivors coming forward and exposing their abusers in order to show a sense of support and unity with other abuse survivors. Many survivors said they had been afraid to tell their stories as they believed people would not believe them or would blame them. However, with this movement allowing so many victims to come forward, it gave them a feeling of safety in knowing they were not alone.

This is the same for cancel culture. It allows for large groups to voice their concerns about a person's behavior without being targeted individually. This is beneficial as it encourages people to be unafraid to point out when a person with great influence has made a mistake or is continuously causing problems. People with power and influence should be held accountable, regardless of their status and shouldn't be able to punish those who are urging them to change.

Cancel culture encourages accountability and growth for the people who are called out. It normalizes bringing offensive behavior to the attention of many, thus promoting the person who has done the wrongdoing to take accountability and educate themselves for the future. The goal in bringing up someone's mistakes or offensive behavior should not be to condemn them or ruin their career, but rather to demonstrate the person's true nature.

Whereas they cannot take back their behavior, they can take responsibility and grow. This serves as a good model for their followers as it shows a mistake does not make someone evil, but their lack of empathy for their mistakes can. This same principle can be applied to cancel culture itself. It has flaws in how it has become synonymous with ostracizing people and promoting toxicity. However, it should be allowed to reform as well. Hopefully, it can evolve to become a way for people to feel comfortable calling out public figures when they have done wrong, and stray away from simply shaming to promoting growth.

As it stands currently, cancel culture is a great starting point for allowing fans of public figures to encourage growth and diminishes the premise of celebrities' actions being excusable simply because they have power. The current major issue with cancel culture is how it perpetuates ending a person's career over a mistake and makes it seem impossible for a person to change. It gives too much leeway for hatefulness, though this is a problem with all of social media and the internet in general, not the fault of cancel culture.

Overall, cancel culture is a beneficial part of modern media as it reduces the stigma around taking accountability and provides people a platform to voice their critiques on a public figure's transgressions. As time goes on, cancel culture will continue to improve as more people on social media realize the power and voice it gives them and the opportunity it gives to those who have made mistakes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cancel culture is a beneficial and necessary part of modern media. Unfortunately though, it is often met with contention as it is regarded as a way to publicly shame people for mistakes. It is considered toxic in how it focuses simply on ending a person's career rather than fixing the mistake they were called out...

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, specifically looking at Presentation.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in-depth SMART planning template, looking at self-management.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, looking at Professional Context.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a more in depth SMART planning template, looking at Evaluation and Critical Engagement.