Let’s Target 2%, not 98%
Let me ask you the following questions:
- Would you rather target 98% of the market or 2%?
- Would you rather target 72% of the market or 22%?
Today, in America, we are watching how “virtue signaling” is causing marketers to target the lesser market share, to avoid being “attacked” on social media.
Let me say something first — the other day, I heard, again, on a podcast, that everyone “hates” social media, but, has to be on it if they want to be aware of what’s happening in the world.
Okay, back to the “new” marketing.
Marketers are in the unenviable position of targeting the 2% or 22% instead of target the market that will surely increase revenue and sales.
Now, don’t get me wrong — these companies ARE trying to address the larger market share, but, it is a very tight line to walk. And, again, they are doing this to avoid being “attacked” in the media as being something that they are not.
Today, words truly are hurtful, to a companies bottom line, even if it is a lie.
There are a few companies out there that are handling the “virtue signaling” with class. And it is those companies that are doing nothing — just continuing to do the same thing that they have done for 50 years — market what they have to the market that buys it.
A great example of the opposite of this, but, must be done, is Indeed. Indeed is currently running a national TV advertisement with a trans individual being interviewed. For the 2% of the USA that is LGBTQ+++, this ad “appeals” (only 46% of LGBTQ+++ individuals approve of the massive propaganda that is being done) to them (that 46%), to the rest of the LGBTQ+++ crowd as well as the 98% that are left, this ad may fall short. Of course, to the 50% of the 98%, this ad also shows them that Indeed is “aware” and “sympathetic” of what’s happening in society right now (whatever that is).
So the question is, have HR Executives now “switched” to Indeed because of this ad (and their “push” to be LGBTQ+++ aware)? Is Indeed now able to say to its investors that its revenue has increased 10-fold because of this ad? Or do they say to their investors that “When we poll people, they say that Indeed supports the LGBTQ+++ crowd”. Of course they don’t say that — making people feel good, without an increase in sales and revenue — because if they did, the marketing team would not be there long. Sorry, I invest in companies to get a return on my investment (and more), not to make people feel good.
What about targeting 22% of the market? And not the whole market?
Again, back to virtue signaling and not being attacked — and this time, literally. The terrorist group BLM (Black Lives Matter) has made companies switch their advertising from targeting 100% of the market to now only targeting the 22% — to avoid being destroyed, both in social media as well as having their stores or HQ’s burned and destroyed.
If you watch TV advertising today, a majority of advertising is now showing mixed race couples (great!), but, reality (which, marketing is now losing site of reality) is is that less than 5% of couples in America are mixed race. Why is that? I don’t know — speak to a sociologist about that. But, it’s a fact. So, why switch all of the advertising that only speaks to 5%?
It isn’t going after the 5% — it’s appeasing the 22% (really, only the 1% that burns and loots and destroys). Again, virtue signaling that they are “like” everyone else and please don’t attack us (either on social media or physically).
It’s unfortunate that marketers are being forced to change their messaging to meet the .01% of the market that is on social media and is angry about everything. The 99.99% of the market, either LGBTQ+++ or Black or White or whatever that just wants to get the best deal, that doesn’t truly care if you are virtue signaling or not, that just wants to purchase a product/service from a company that does not kill puppies, that does not discriminate (which 99.99% never did to begin with), and that gives the best deal. It’s that easy and simple — which, unfortunately, is no longer the way of marketers.