There’s an exchange I’ve had with many clients over the years that goes something like this: They brief the agency on the need for a new platform, that says something positive about their brand. For argument’s sake we’ll say it’s XYZ insurance. We come up with one - for argument’s sake we’ll say it’s ‘XYZ. Insurance you can rely on.’ The client says they like it, but that are hesitant to make such a definitive statement, because they feel it would be attacked on social by:
Some group of customers they have stiffed somehow eg flood victims they have refused to pay out on
A bunch of employees they made redundant when they shut down an office somewhere
Customers who have faced their lengthy call centre wait times
Etc etc
‘On social, people can just flip that on us and say we were anything but reliable.’
The client is, of course, 100% right. People On Social can scoff at your end line. But here’s the thing about People On Social: they will do that whatever your line is. If your brand is big - and if it has bruising encounters with various stakeholders in the market - those aggrieved folks are going to grind their axe regardless. It’s not for me - the agency copywriter - to craft a line that simultaneously delivers all the positivity the client wants, and linguistically snookers the keyboard warriors. There is no snookering them.
Even though we seem to all agree that ‘the Comments section’ displays all of humanity’s worst impulses, we seem intent on giving these people more and more power. In advertising - and in culture more broadly - we need to just accept there is going to be a degree of vitriol there, and get comfortable with it. Obviously that level will be elevated if your company is committing bastardry in pursuit of profit. But I can’t do anything about that. All I can do is write a simple, impactful, plausible articulation of what you claim to be about. It’s then over to you as a company to get as close to that promise as possible.