The ‘Crass’ Joke Told By Bristol Gin Company at June 1
A gin company has been widely criticized after posting an advert on Twitter.
As BLM protests erupted in the US in June, Bristol Gin faced a social media backlash after it tweeted that rioters favored its gin due to its flammability. The now deleted tweet from the gin distillery, read: ‘When the shooting starts the looting starts. Voted №1 gin by rioters for its complex botanical mix and high flammability’, which referenced a tweet posted by Donald Trump about “shooting and looting”.
It all started on Monday 1 June 2020, after days of protests across the US sparked by the murder of George Floyd by a now-fired police officer. Some 40 cities around the country have issued curfews, and footage across social media shows instances of excess force and tear gas being used to subdue crowds, as well as looting.
Bristol Dry Gin’s advert said rioters would like its “high flammability” amid widespread protests in the US about the death of George Floyd.
A retailer and a cafe said they had removed the gin from sale, and the Bristol Pantry has also removed the company as a supplier while vegan deli Flip said it had “no intention of continuing stock”.
Tom Harvey, co-founder of alcohol marketing agency YesMore, told the drinks business the post broke the UK’s advertising standards regulations due to the fact that it linked alcohol and violence.
Harvey said the post was “somewhat crass and screams of either desperation, naivety, or seriously poor judgement.”
Initially, the company attempted to joke about the backlash with upset commenters on Facebook, but later issued an apology on Twitter, which still referenced the name of the gin. This, again received widespread criticism.
Under this storm of public opinion, the company apologized and said it was ‘just poking a little fun’ at US President Donald Trump when it put out the post on both its Facebook and Twitter accounts.
The tweet was subsequently deleted “as it was badly edited and needed revising.”
In a follow-up post on Wednesday morning, the company said: “We are genuinely sorry for causing offense (sic) with our insensitive tweet.”
“It was a misjudged attempt to make a joke about a very serious situation. We got it very badly wrong.”
“We fully understand that the events and outrage, following George Floyd’s death, are momentous and far reaching.”
“All of us at the company are determined not to make a similar mistake again and we will be working hard to make a positive contribution.
“We will also be fully reviewing how we use social media. This will not happen again.
“It doesn’t change anything but we’ve today made a donation to Black Lives Matter, who have been very helpful.
“We have been in contact with SARI (Stand Against Racism and Inequality) in Bristol to support their work with profits from the gin.”
However, this is not the first time the company has courted controversy, with an apology over a ‘Novichok’ vodka range in 2018, posted around the time of the Salisbury Novichok poisonings.
In my opinion, the company was obviously not doing well enough to deal with this social media storm. First of all, they were still trying to explain that it was a joke when they first apologized. The company did not realize that conflict and pain are not things that can be used as jokes. They are not sensitive enough to the emotions of the audience.
Secondly, the brand did not know enough about the advertising regulations of various countries on the alcohol industry. The association of alcohol and violence violated the British advertising standards. They published posts rashly without doing enough homework and research in advance. Obviously they would suffer Public criticism and boycotting.
Furthermore, in my opinion, this is a social media disaster that can be completely avoided. Since it has caused controversy in the public eye before, the company should be more cautious in editing when publishing social media information next time. When trying to link advertisements with real-time facts, consider the internal relevance and appropriateness, otherwise it will be considered by the public to be blindly trying to follow news fever without thinking about it, lacking empathy or even counterproductive, leaving consumers with a negative brand impression.
