The great advertising scandal of this summer is, without a doubt, the one that is carried out by Facebook. The company has been dragged into a difficult situation. The call for a boycott launched by several American civil rights associations – who claim that the company is not being sufficiently active against disinformation and hate speech – has resonated powerfully with advertisers.In a clearer way or in a more discreet and silent way, several big brands have ended up joining the boycott against the platform and pausing their advertising campaigns. Facebook’s reaction has not been the most efficient and its management of this crisis is in fact becoming an example of how not to manage a reputational and services crisis.In previous crises, as in the case of Cambridge Analytica, the blow of the big brands is offset by the activity of SMEs, which are a constant in Facebook advertising. The big question is whether that will continue this time or whether the impact and pull of the boycott will end up dragging them down as well. Some analysts already pointed out at the beginning of the month that in this crisis small companies seemed to be adding to the situation.One of the latest studies on the boycott and its success has been produced by Digiday .
The study has asked agency Congo Email List buyers about what has happened these weeks and if their clients have asked to pause the investment in the social network and in its advertising environment.The number of companies that have decided not to stop their advertising spending on Facebook and its environment is surprisingly low. Only 40% are maintaining their activity. In front of her are the 56% who have canceled their campaigns this month following the protest action and the 4% who do not know what has happened with their investment in the social network. Therefore, more than half of the companies, if the data from this study is extrapolated, have pressed the pause button on Facebook.Although the companies seem to be reacting and acting, the heads of the agencies do not believe that these measures will have a real and concrete effect.
When asked if they think the boycott is going to be the catalyst for significant change, 55% say they don’t see it. In front of them, 46% are convinced that something will happen after all this.In addition, and as they remember in Digiday , Facebook is not only being weighed down by the effects of the reputation crisis, but also by the effects of the economic crisis. Some companies were already going to cut advertising investment due to the effects of the coronavirus. Where will the future goWill companies return after the reputation crisis and the end of the boycott? Or does Facebook have a serious problem presenting its brand values and principles? In reality, few companies believe that Facebook fits with them: only 5% believe, according to their agencies, that Facebook’s values align with those of the brands.
47% of buyers acknowledge that their customers would invest more in Facebook if the social network had a better reputation and 46% if it had stronger values. Be that as it may, therefore, Facebook has a serious problem.Marketers believe that certain actions could help Facebook move towards a better situation. 59% believe that they should remove hate speech from the platform and 56% that they should remove users and groups that promote such hate speech.They also believe that companies should have more mechanisms: 52% that should give more control. 35% think they should undergo external audits and 20% think they should pay brands back if their ads appear with hateful content.