This is like the Kaepernick Flag protest in that the original issue is getting massaged. The problem is the Bud Light lady spoke out against her customer base. If she just said we sell beer to everyone, it would have blown over.
However, She said:
She added further that she had a “super clear” mandate that “to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand.” She said that what she “brought” to the brand was a “belief” that to evolve and elevate means to incorporate “inclusivity, it means shifting the tone, it means having a campaign that’s truly inclusive, and feels lighter and brighter and different, and appeals to women and to men.”
She then disparaged the work of Bud Light’s past branding.
“We had this hangover, I mean Bud Light had been kind of a brand of fratty, kind of out-of-touch humor, and it was really important that we had another approach,” she said.
Say the inclusive part but don't then call your current customers "out-of-touch". And truthfully I don't understand why a company that has multiple brands messes with an existing brand even though it is slipping. You can put that same swill in another can and market to any group you want. If the Bud Light brand dies because the customers die, what does it matter to a conglomerate. I can name many brands of beer that no longer exist. That matters if it is your only product, not if you own 30 other product lines. I mean Stella Artois sounds much more in line with your "inclusive" fan base.