Has the latest Swiggy controversy reminded brands that it is okay to have a political opinion?

• Food delivery app Swiggy’s response to a tweet from a parody Nirmala Sitharaman account around the ongoing farmers' protest stirred up a new row of controversy on social media.
• However, unlike other brands, Swiggy hasn’t withdrawn its tweet after the boycott trend.
• We spoke to experts to find out if brands should dare comment at all around a political controversy or ignore the online trolls to keep talking about issues that matter.
• Experts also shared with us the ideal ways of dealing with online trolls.

Yet another brand has found itself in the crosshairs of a boycott trend on social media. Food delivery app Swiggy’s response to a tweet from a parody Nirmala Sitharaman account around the ongoing farmers’ protest was the talk of the town on December 01. The conversation soon snowballed and erupted into a controversy leading to #BoycottSwiggy trending on Twitter.


Swiggy responded to this tweet with the wit and humour it is known for, saying, “sorry, we can’t refund education.”

In the last few months as people have had more time to kill, many brands, actors and celebrities have been boycotted online. However, they have either chosen silence or deleted their campaigns and opinionated tweets to stay away from controversies. We were surprised to see Swiggy take the higher ground and firmly stand true to its opinion. At the time of filing this story, Swiggy’s tweet hasn’t been retracted yet and has over 32k likes.

It saw a mixed response from the Twitterati yesterday. Some were quick to jump in to ask for another boycott for ‘calling Hindus uneducated,’ some were thrilled to see a brand take a stand and some just advised the brand to stay away from such controversies.

Lately, it has become increasingly tough for a brand to navigate through these volatile climes and have a political or any kind of opinion. And millennials are known for buying brands who stand up for what they believe in. So should brands have an opinion at all or take a firm stand? Do consumers lose trust in brands who retract their opinions and what is the ideal way to deal with online trolls? We reached out to brand experts to find out.

Karthik Srinivasan, Social Media Expert and Independent Communications Consultant, brought up an important point. He reminded us that a brand without an opinion is just an entity that sells a product.

“When brands joined social media and started behaving like media, they started having a voice and an opinion. So, it's a bit too late to ask the question if brands should have a voice or an opinion. If they stop having either of those, then they would be reduced to selling their products or services, and that would be functional, and now perceived as boring communication. As for volatile, controversial or political content, there are no specific guidelines that can dictate those markers. ITC Bingo's recent controversy that blindsided them from nowhere is a good example. If brands err on the side of caution, they'd self-censor themselves to the point of sticking to functional content only, going back to boring communication,” said Srinivasan.

On the other hand, Harish Bijoor, Brand-strategy specialist & Founder, Harish Bijoor Consults Inc. said that brands should ‘avoid two sanctum sanctorum topics: politics and religion altogether for now’ (referring to the political climate we are living in).

He said, “There will be two sets of Swiggy users now. Those who support and those who oppose. I ask, why? Why divide users at all? Keep them united under the umbrella of the brand, instead of dividing under the same umbrella. I do strongly believe that brands must not dabble in the space of active politics and religion. When brands do, they divide society. The ultimate aim of a brand is it to divide society into supporters and opposers. Instead, brand’s aim and goal is to unite all under the umbrella of the brand. Woke is a very distant movement for now in India. Avoid it in the interest of the brand.”

However, brands build a personality with their external communication. They associate themselves with a value to fill a consumer gap. A CMO and advertising agency’s core job is to keep building an image through advertisements that speaks to their consumers heart-to-heart. So, can a message be ever delivered sans emotions and appeal to a large set of audience?

Srinivasan answered, “Like how we deal with people we live with, people we love or people we are acquainted with, if they have a different point of view on so-called contentious topics like the choice of political party/leader, religion, sports etc. we continue to put up with them because their diverging opinion is only one small part of who they are and what they believe in. Similarly, the brand's voice online is merely one facet of its overall corporate personality, while it could perfectly serve the functional need for which we buy/use it.”

Speaking on whether brands should have a political opinion, Lloyd Mathias, Business Strategist and Former Asia Marketing Head of HP Inc said, “Brands should be more circumspect but not shy away from doing what is right for their brands. They need to be conscious of the fact that social media allows consumers to react and share their views, so they need to fully analyse the possible reactions – but in no way should they hold back from doing the right thing.”

GenZ is increasingly becoming more aware of how advertising works and is able to separate grey from black. They view brands as a form of self-expression and to connect with them, brands are also expected to go beyond just selling their products. They are known to connect with brands that they feel are socially and environmentally conscious.

Sharing his thoughts on GenZ and brands taking a stand, Mathias said, “While it is important for companies and brands to respect public sentiment, it should not stop them from speaking out on issues that matter. Brands are important elements in shaping culture. They play a big part in influencing consumer behaviour and moulding opinion. With increasing GenZ and millennial consumers becoming a large part of most brands' target segments, there will be pressure on brands and companies to take firm stands on issues that matter to these young people. Looking away is no longer an easy option.”

If a brand does take a stand, online trolls and their boycott trend is likely to follow. On how a brand should deal with online controversies, Srinivasan said, “There's a difference between 'I refuse to buy it' vs. 'I refuse to buy it and I ask you all to behave like me'. The former is a perfectly understandable stand, and is a personal decision. When someone rallies around it to get more people to follow suit, that is a campaign. Such campaigns are more performative than meaningful - a show of strength by one group or other to force the brand to do as they wish. If the brand submits to the demand, another group could start a boycott campaign for submitting to the first group's demands. So, it's a perpetual cycle if they brand sways by one group or another.”

He added, “As long as the brand's service or product is serving a useful need, they need to remember the saying, "This too shall pass", because on social media it really does pass. People cannot boycott all the brands all the time and they have a lot of other things to do besides starting boycott campaigns on assorted brands for one reason or another. They simply need to get their brand's personality detailed out, and stick to that. The problem invariably is that brands work harder on external identity markers like design, logo, colors etc. and less on the inherent personality traits like tone, language, stand on issues affecting the audiences they target. The latter is particularly essential because when the brand joins social media, they become one of the people who use the platforms online. As long as the stand they adopt is based on explainable logic and common sense, they just need to stick to the personality.”