Was This Luxury Diaper Ad Worth It?
I want to come out of the gate here and say that this was an incredibly creative campaign. It took self-awareness on the part of one brand and a willingness to take on risk on the part of a non-profit. Kudos to all parties for taking a swing like this.
But in today’s short-sighted social world, was it the right call?
Okay, So What Happened? What Am I Even Talking About?
Roughly one week ago Goop posted the below on their Instagram account, promoting a new “luxury'“ diaper lined with alpaca wool, fastened with gemstones and and infused with jasmine scent.
I mean…just look at it.
I came across this on my Instagram stories and re-shared it on Twitter with an “of course Goop would make something like this” type of message. I mean, come on. I spend enough time on the internet to know many people spend their days disconnected with reality so this was within the realm of possible to me.
If you aren’t familiar with Goop as a brand, you may have found my initial take as gullible. But you clearly aren’t familiar with this Gwyneth Paltrow brainchild. You can see a list of some of the craziest products here but here are a few quick highlights:
Psychic Vampire Repellent Spray ($27)
DIY coffee enema kit
Toothpaste squeezer
Vagina scented candle
So was it within the realm of possibility that they may sell alpaca wool-lined diapers at a $120 for a 12-pack price point?
Yes, yes it was.
But It Was A Stunt. Albeit, A Very On-Brand PR Stunt.
As it turned out, this was all a big prank coordinated between Goop, the ad agency Mother and LA-based nonprofit Baby2Baby. The whole thing was designed to set people off and get angry at the idea of a diaper being a luxury item.
As it turns out, diapers are often taxed like a luxury item in many states instead of an essential. Goop partnered with Baby2Baby to raise awareness for this, change legislation in a lot of states and help support the organization with providing diapers and other essential baby needs to low-income families. You can read more about that partnership here or listen to Gwyneth Paltrow talk about it in her follow-up Instagram video.
Credit Where Credit is Due
It’s easy to dunk on Paltrow, Goop and other things that I find personally ridiculous.
I also have to give credit where credit is due.
Gwyneth Paltrow and the Goop team showed a humbling amount of self-awareness to let something as ridiculous as a gem-studded diaper be featured as a new product from them with the hope that people would take it seriously. It was a bit of self-deprecating humor that I honestly didn’t expect from a brand like theirs.
Also kudos to Mother and Baby2Baby for being in on the joke. Before last week, I didn’t know who Baby2Baby was, what they did and was oblivious to the fact that diapers are often taxed like luxury goods (which hits the lowest income families the hardest). There was a lot of earned media surrounding the PR stunt so if awareness was the goal, they did it.
By most measures of success (and I’m sure as the future case study on the Mother website will boldly declare) this was a very successful campaign. You had a PR stunt that was very much on-brand for one surprisingly self-aware company helping raise awareness for a worthy cause.
But was it successful?
I feel like you could argue both sides of this easily. It’s easy to count the potential wins (brand impressions, potential uptick in donations for Baby2Baby, etc). But there could be downstream brand consequences.
The Danger of the PR Stunt In Today’s Media Environment
In most facets of life, we don’t see much more than a few feet in front of us. We live our work lives in 30-minute Outlook calendar increments. We plan for quarters. We consume media in short bursts with goldfish-like attention. Odds are, 2/3 of the people who started reading this article haven’t made it to this sentence.
We also have a media environment that incentivizes short flash-in-the-pan moments in time like they’re the end of the world. One tweet, one unfairly cropped photo or video can rain down on a person. I’m not innocent of this. As noted earlier, I sent out a mean tweet myself trashing Goop for this diaper idea (a tweet that has since been deleted).
It’s also very hard to undo a first impression online. Just read this post from Charlie Warzel using scientific findings to discover why un-learning something is so hard to do. From the piece:
When information is encoded into memory and then new information that discredits it is learned, the original information is not simply erased or replaced. Instead, misinformation and corrective information coexist and compete for activation.
So, while Goop came in the next day to declare the whole thing a stunt and announce their true intentions, some damage had already been done. A lie can travel around the world and ack again while the truth is lacing up its boots according to Mark Twain. And he’s right.
Disinformation isn’t reserved for the political arena. It can creep into any online space and this brand’s joking use of disinformation could backfire in the long term. PR stunts like this carry far more risk than they did even 3-5 years ago.
For a PR stunt like Goop’s to really work, they need to trust people to give them redemption. To follow-up on the story on their own accord and learn that it was all a well-intentioned gag. How often have you seen forgiveness in the public arena on Twitter?
Mother, Baby2Baby and Gwyneth Paltrow may have already calculated all of those risks in beforehand and felt the cause was worth the potential costs. If so - good for them! If they were willing to put reputations on the line to help more babies get diapers - and it actually worked - that’s awesome!
Only time will tell if the long-term effect of this will be positive, negative or if anyone will remember it a week from now.
What do you think?
The pros and cons of this campaign are easily argued in good faith. I would be curious as to your thoughts on whether or not you felt this was a successful campaign.