IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jacres/doi10.1086-722697.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Brands and Social Justice Movements: The Effects of True versus Performative Allyship on Brand Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie Spielmann
  • Susan Dobscha
  • L. J. Shrum

Abstract

Following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, many brands tried to convey their support of #BLM (Black Lives Matter) on social media (Blackout Tuesday). Some brands engaged in performative allyship (expressing allyship in words only), whereas other brands expressed support through words and deeds (true allyship). This research tests whether true versus performative brand allyship matters to consumers. We show that for the period following Blackout Tuesday, true ally brands performed better than performative ally brands and neutral brands (staying silent). Two experiments show that true ally brands are evaluated more positively than performative ally brands and that this effect is mediated by self-esteem and self-brand connection but moderated by race (greater effect of true allyship for Black consumers than White consumers). These findings suggest that brands have little to gain from acting as performative allies, and even less so toward the communities most affected by social injustice.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie Spielmann & Susan Dobscha & L. J. Shrum, 2023. "Brands and Social Justice Movements: The Effects of True versus Performative Allyship on Brand Evaluation," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 8(1), pages 83-94.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/722697
    DOI: 10.1086/722697
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/722697
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/722697
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/722697?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/722697. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JACR .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.