When bad things happen to good brands

There's a lot of media coverage in relation to the shooting of 17-year-old Treyvon Martin down in Florida. For those that haven't heard about it, a young black male was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch member who had called 911 and alerted them about the suspicious character in a hoodie. The shooter, George Zimmerman, has been convicted of assault, and to my knowledge, was not supposed to have a gun. He has a history of calling 911 over other instances of suspicious behavior. When Trayvon was killed, he had Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea in his possession, leading to the belief that there was a racial component to the killing.

A protestor at a rally for Trayvon Martin.

The point of telling you this is to talk about brands that have become associated to, been damaged by, or benefited from, a tragedy. It might seem odd that a company could benefit from something like the death of a 17-year-old boy, but that is exactly what has happened to Skittles. Schools, t-shirt companies, and protestors are all buying the candy. "The candy has been transformed into a cultural icon, a symbol of racial injustice that underscores Trayvon’s youth and the circumstances surrounding his death," says the NY Times.

When the tragedy happened, people all over wanted Wrigley's (the company who owns Skittles) to make a statement. Now that their sales are up, people want Skittles to donate money from their increased sales to the Martin family or to anti-racism efforts, even going as so far as to boycott the candy until Wrigley's does something.

I've talked about good press vs bad press before, but this falls into a grey area. I believe that Skittles has done the right thing thus far. In an issue so politically charged, regardless of their stance they will alienate people. By taking a more quiet stance, they are allowing the controversy to unfold. Skittles is also an innocent victim, thrust into the spotlight without their knowledge or consent. What I mean by this is that Skittles is not a racially tied food. It is not marketed to one race, or even one age group. They do not have political affiliations or agendas. They are just colored sugar.

I do believe that Skittles should donate some money to an anti-racism group, but I also understand if they don't. Like I said, they are not a political candy. It is not in their business strategy to donate to this cause. However, it may help to save face, so to speak.

What do you think Skittles should do? What kind of effect will this event have on the company a year or two down the line?