M&M’s Spokescandies Are Back For Good Following Controversy
Loved by people of all ages, candy company M&M’s has been under fire since January 2022 when it decided to give its spokescandies a marginally new look. Who knew a wardrobe change for candy could spark — what seems to be — a never-ending controversy?
Let’s Break It Down: What’s Been Going On With M&M’s
The green candy ditched her pair of heeled boots for more comfortable shoes and the brown candy ditched her stilettos for shorter, more comfortable block heels. What was spoken about lesser in midst of this controversy was the fact that the orange M&M, with his new look, embraced his anxiety. Following that, in September 2022 the new purple peanut M&M’s candy made her debut which dug deeper into the idea of inclusivity and acceptance with her singing “I’m just gonna be me”. In December that year — early for Women’s Day the following year — the company released an all-female M&M’s pack with only purple, brown, and green colored candies in it. Up to $500,000 from sales would go to female-empowerment organizations.
M&M’s further tried to save itself in January 2023, announcing that Maya Rudolph would be its new spokesperson and that the company would do away with the spokescandies altogether; which were introduced in 1960. Rudolph has not had much controversy attached to her name and with M&M’s involved in what seemed to be a culture war, the company felt it would be a safe option. Attempting to bring humor to this controversy, the announcement was followed by a series of Super Bowl commercials featuring the actor. Soon after, M&M’s announced that its spokescandies were “back for good”.
People Aren’t Too Happy About the Wardrobe Change
Over a year since this ongoing controversy began and people aren’t getting any happier with M&M’s response. Owned by Mars, Incorporated which declared annual revenues of $45 billion in 2022, the idea behind this was to make M&M’s appear more inclusive and accepting with the change in footwear attempting to indicate female empowerment.
However, the little wardrobe change had people furious at M&M’s and even encouraged people to stop buying the candy. Tucker Carlson found the M&M’s without heels “deeply unappealing” and “wouldn’t want to have a drink with any one of them”. While M&M’s didn’t report this, people were quick to assume the purple candy was transgender and this did not sit well with them.
My Thoughts
That was a lot to unpack and, honestly, what I’ve learned over time since this first started, is the fact that people’s interpretations of the message are what caused the controversy. M&M’s attempted to showcase its brand as more inclusive and accepting and did it very carefully without really standing strong for a cause and only stating female empowerment, inclusivity, and acceptance. However, what started as a simple wardrobe change slowly started to spiral out of control.
I don’t think M&M could have avoided this controversy but may not have seen it coming as consumers’ interpretations of the message are what caused it. The brand may have assumed that these subtle changes would go unnoticed by most. Every time the company attempted to fix its brand image, it only, unknowingly, dug itself a deeper grave. However, following up on my blog post from last week, with markets in most industries being saturated with options, I believe today’s consumer cares more about the “why” behind a brand and the numbers support my claim. Consumers are more likely to buy a product from a brand that supports a cause they care about; the exception being when a substitute from another brand is more easily accessible. If not today, M&M would, at some point, have to talk more about why it does what it does.
It’s not like taking a stand and stating the “why” behind a business is a novel concept. Companies take a stand all the time right from Tampax — who has had its own fair share of controversy — to Nike — a company bold enough to take a stand on sensitive issues despite the impact on its brand but has little to no controversy. I believe part of it may have to do with consumer perception of a brand and what they sell. People believe “it’s just candy” or “it’s just a tampon” so “let it be just that” and “not everything has to be political”. Another factor is that companies like Nike have been taking a stand for a while now, but for M&M’s, this may be newer, so its consumer does not expect it.
Some believe that this controversy was confined to a polarized but limited audience. Overall, I believe it helped get the conversation going about M&M’s and made the company a more top-of-mind brand. It will be interesting to see whether this controversy continues and where it goes from here. Since M&M’s reintroduced its spokescandies, not much has been spoken about the company or the controversy.
