A U.S. processed meat company has recently suffered a catastrophic listeria contamination problem causing them to recall millions of pounds of their product. All of us cringe at such a recall’s ramifications on the impacted company and our industry.

Let me ask you straight out, should any of that maligned company’s competitors tell their consumers that their company hasn’t had any listeria problems? Or should the message from these competitive processed meat companies be more nuanced by not overtly saying they don’t have any listeria problems, but telling their consumers all the steps they take to keep any form of bacterial contamination snuffed out and not in any of their products? Or should they say nothing at all?

A “damning by implication” leaves those who are hearing such a message to infer for themselves that the listeria affected company’s products may not be as clean and probably should be avoided in favor of “ours.” What the “Mr. Clean” companies are really saying is that their products are uncontaminated, implying that isn’t it too bad that that other listeria affected company must not have had the same level of contamination prophylaxis, or they wouldn’t have suffered such a catastrophic event? And that, my friends is pointing the offending finger of blame squarely at the listeria-maligned company and a class A example of name calling, AKA negative advertising.

Or should all of us in the meat and poultry processing business give a hug sigh of relief, saying to ourselves, “There, but for the grace of God, go any or all of us.” This, of course, implies that we will not take advantage of any competitor problem.

But, shouldn’t we?

This meat and poultry business is competitive, and, as we know all too well, a cutthroat one, that really relishes a competitor’s suffering or going out of business. In fact, such a competitor calamity is really any surviving company’s best marketing plan.

I suppose the germane question is "Does such negative advertising work?" You’ve got to admit in this current political season, negative advertising abounds. Is it working? It must be or politicians of every stripe wouldn’t be using it.

Let’s be serious. If politicians can call each other names, denigrate their opponents' heritage, dismiss others' programs ad nauseum, why shouldn’t we promote our products in a similar manner? But, polticis is a zero-sum game with a clear winner and loser. Not so for our industry's messaging.

In meat and poultry marketing, a short-term clear winner may emerge, but the staying power of that winner is the real goal of any company, be it a startup or one of multi-generational ownership. Negative promotional efforts may linger longer than the product’s “season” and thus the negativity remains in consumers’ minds longer than the product’s desirability. So, any negative advertising may not work after the sales “season” is over.

However, isn't the seductive pull of doing such negative advertising crossing all of our minds? I mean, if we can advance consumer take away with some direct, albeit, negative messaging, shouldn’t we do everything in our power to do so? That may mean saying to all who will listen all the positive things we do in our processing plants to keep any form of product contamination a distant memory and certainly not a current probability. This allows consumers to infer the opposite for our competitor’s products.

Is negative advertising a Machiavellian approach to marketing meat? My answer is probably, yes. BTW, Machiavellian is defined as a personality trait characterized by interpersonal manipulation, indifference to morality, lack of empathy, and a calculated focus on self-interest. Wow, who wants to be accused of that?

My caveat, of course, is that those of us in the meat and poultry businesses really don’t have the luxury of a short political season. Our advertising thinking and execution must be built around long-term results. Negative advertising with all of its seductive pull just isn’t a long term successful one for us. Quite frankly, we are better than those “short-term” thinking politicians as we have a higher regard for our customers/consumers.

I just wish the current crop of politicians held the same beliefs about their “consumers.”

Name Calling: Is it Effective Advertising?

Join for free* to continue reading.