Giveaway Blowout: When A Gift Becomes An Insult
Reese Witherspoon’s dress brand, Draper James, promises free dresses for teachers during the pandemic and fails to deliver.
Last year, during the pandemic, the actress’s brand released a supporting post sympathizing with teachers all across the United States. In the original post, the company offers a free dress for teachers who register during the giveaway campaign designated dates. According to The Cut, “While the post does refer to “winners”, it is not completely clear that there were limited quantities available”. As imagined, this sort of incomplete, misleading information resulted in Draper James having over 1 million applications and a highly upset and betrayed audience.
The company sent a discount code for non-winners, however, the damage was already done. In addition, some were insulted by the discount and accused it of being insensitive and out of context since the dresses are too expensive for most teachers with a 20% — 30% discount. The controversy initiated worldwide headlines and has resulted in a class-action lawsuit, with the plaintiffs stating the giveaway was a “systemic marketing and promotion scam” that took advantage of the pandemic to increase Draper James’ database of email addresses.
“This lawsuit is an unjust attempt to exploit Draper James’ good intentions to honor the teacher community by gifting hundreds of free dresses,” Theane Evangelis said in a statement to BuzzFeed News. She added that the original Instagram post clearly disclosed the fact that supplies were limited “and is no basis for a lawsuit”. Even if these facts are enough to dispatch the plaintiffs’ accusations, the damage that the court can’t resolve, and is most likely the most important one, is the public image of the brand that has been severly damaged.
After reading the original post, I came to a conclusion that it is clear enough to understand not everyone qualifies for a free dress, yet it is kind of shady and can also see how some misread the information. I do believe the main reason behind this campaign was to increase the company’s email database and the way they did so wasn't right. Furthermore, if it was up to me, I would handled the situation differently.
Firstly, I would make sure that the post is 100% straightforward with the message. It is completely fine and even encouraged to support the teachers community in those tough times, but double check followers don’t think you are committing to something you haven’t intended to. Secondly, I argue that a large portion of the giveaway backfire could have been avoided if the discount wouldn't be gifted to the non-winners. Instead, an early message explaining and apologizing regarding the misunderstanding, as a substitute to what many viewed as an insult (discount), would have decreased the volume of negative responses and perhaps even prevent followers form joining the lawsuit.
