However, some have also argued that Pepsi will have been happy with the launch (and subsequent) withdrawal of its new ad, because it got the whole world talking about the brand.
After a stunning backlash against an ad which shows protestors and police settling their differences over a can of the drink, the company yesterday apologised and admitted it "clearly missed the mark".
Even after that apology, Mary Harding, MD at PR agency Tangerine, suggested that Pepsi's marketing director would be "more than likely over the moon with the reaction to the ad launch". However, she also noted the lack of substance to Pepsi's peace-loving credentials, saying: "Pepsi needs to actually put its money where it's mouth is and build a wider campaign to support political movements...it will be interesting to see if they do so."
Two PR professionals commenting on Twitter were far less forgiving - suggesting Pepsi staffers' jobs should be in question.
Marketing heads should roll at Pepsi! How did anyone sign off on this? https://t.co/saIXo3gzu6
— Perveen Akhtar (@PerveenAkhtar) April 5, 2017
Whoever signed that off in the @pepsi advertising creative team (plus the PR people that green lighted this) needs their P45's #terribleidea
— Johann Alexander (@JohannRed16) April 5, 2017
Two more comms pros said that the apology issued by Pepsi just made the brand look worse.
@samburnejames @pepsi @prweekuknews A brand with an over-inflated sense of its own worth+meaning. Too many brands think they 'mean' something. They don't, they're brands...1/2
— Martin Ballantine (@piracycorp) April 6, 2017
@samburnejames @pepsi @prweekuknews ...very few able to achieve that kind of status. Brands that do tend to be ones that are 'born' with meaning e.g. Ben & Jerry's/Patagonia.
— Martin Ballantine (@piracycorp) April 6, 2017
@samburnejames @prweekuknews @pepsi Seriously misplaced loyalty by apologising to Kendall... reinforces the frightening disconnect from their audiences that led to ad release
— Colm Woods (@CollieWoods) April 6, 2017
A reader poll on PRWeek US points at a lack of diversity in marketing departments, and over-enthusiastic attempts to reach millennials, as the big causes of Pepsi's misjudged campaign.
It also suggests a lack of PR input, saying an experienced comms professional would have "squashed" the campaign. Women In PR president Mary Whenman said an experience in a previous job underlined the importance of PR sign-off on ad campaigns.
I worked for a client who insisted all brand ads went through corporate communications for a reality check https://t.co/aFyR5Cy7C3 1/2
— Mary Whenman (@marywhenman) April 5, 2017
We pulled an ad 2 hours before it aired. It saved the brand's reputation. It was racist & suggested underage sex https://t.co/aFyR5Cy7C3 2/2
— Mary Whenman (@marywhenman) April 5, 2017
In another poll, this time on PRWeek sister title Campaign, a majority of readers agree that Pepsi's problems were rooted in using an in-house agency, which lacked the perspective that an outside firm would have provided. One PRWeek reader clearly agrees.
Lessons from Pepsi - use an external agency. They bring something called external perspective. Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez
— Chris Blackwood (@Blackwood_C) April 6, 2017
PRWeek US writer Diana Bradley also weighed in on the debate.
Pepsi ad reminder to brands not to underestimate consumers. They can see when yr being opportunistic. https://t.co/bgxvWl2UNi
— Diana Bradley (@prweekdiana) April 6, 2017
Finally, sports specialists Pitch Marketing Group pointed out that it already hadn't been a great week for Pepsi.
Major League Baseball confirms deal with @CocaCola to replace @pepsi as league's official soft drink https://t.co/Bfk91DzFHG pic.twitter.com/8ePZwgvuuj
— PitchMarketingGroup (@pitchlondon) April 4, 2017
