We are living at a time where there are conflicts taking place in every corner of the world. At the time of writing this, there are at least a handful countries that are involved in conflicts, and a handful more that have internal conflicts. As digital marketers, it could be very tempting to leverage these conflicts for your marketing ideas. But is it ethical? Is it moral? Here’s what we think.

Whenever there’s a dilemma in making decisions, one element that has to be thrown out of the window is morality. To attain objectivity, we have to make a few assumptions. Let us assume that a brand’s target audience takes the messaging of the campaign in the right way. Let us assume that there are no legal consequences to our campaign. Let’s assume that all bases are covered and the reputation of the brand we handle is going to skyrocket after the campaign. 

But there is one player here we’ve not even considered. Algorithms. Here’s a small story to explain how algorithms work. Around 2018 or 2019, piracy was at its peak in cinema, and it was difficult to ban sites because they changed domains often. Twitter was a popular platform where the updated domain names used to get shared by netizens. The Tamil Film Industry’s anti piracy cell began a crackdown in association with Twitter. Whenever any tweet contained a part of the specific piracy site’s name, the user’s account was restricted. 

A popular online media portal decided to cover this crackdown as news, and Twitter algorithm ended up blocking the media portal’s official Twitter account, and even with a verified account, it took a week for the account to be retrieved. The algorithm doesn’t care about who you are, or how good your marketing idea is. Whenever a set of restricted words are used, either as your posts on X, or stories and posts on Instagram, the algorithm starts acting against your account. 

Today, as there is a conflict going on between two nations in the Middle East, agencies shouldn’t rush to use it as a tool to market brands, because it is both unethical and immoral. It could further hurt sentiments.

Moreover, using conflicts for marketing purposes might give marketers a short term ‘high’. But in the long run, the brand we are working for will suffer. Even when your intentions are right, it might come across as opportunistic, and insincere. In the age of social media, consumers are becoming increasingly aware of what is happening all around the world, and there is a trend of consumers supporting socially aware brands, and boycotting brands that appear insensitive. Take the Israel Palestine conflict as a case study. When news spread that brands like Starbucks, McDonalds, Disney, Coca Cola, and Pepsico had taken sides in the conflict, boycott campaigns started on platforms like Instagram and X. As a result, their brand image took a hit and their share prices massively dropped. All this says one thing – social media driven boycott campaigns do have some effect on brands and shouldn’t be taken lightly. 

It is always advisable to weigh short term gains against long term consequences. Therefore marketers need to focus on strategies that fosters positive customer connections. When both the man(customers) and the machine(the algorithms) are against a brand, survival gets difficult. Responsible marketing need not necessarily bank on ethics and morals. Marketing agencies need not think of whether they are on the right track. All they’ve to think about is the consequence of their action, and how it would impact their client brands. That makes decision making more objective, and consequently easier.

What are your thoughts about this? Let us know in the comments.