WASHINGTON — Beer maker Heineken wades into the stormy waters of politically-charged ads with a four-minute video that many have touted as a counter to the highly controversial Pepsi ad featuring model Kendall Jenner.
Earlier in April, Pepsi shortly pulled their ad after many criticized it for missing the mark with its depiction of social justice-oriented protest.
With the help of a London-based agency, Heineken’s latest ad is framed with this caption, found on their video released on YouTube last week:
Heineken presents ‘Worlds Apart’ An Experiment. Can two strangers with opposing views prove that there’s more that unites than divides us? #OpenYourWorld
In the ad, strangers are grouped into pairs and tasked to build a bar in an empty warehouse. They don’t know about each other’s political views, but they’ve been paired up as opposites: one pair, a self-described “feminist 100 percent” and one who sees feminism as “an excuse” for hating men; another pair, a transgender woman and a man who doesn’t accept the existence of transgender people; and the last pair, a climate change supporter and a denier.
After they build the bar and find out more about each other in the process, their opposing views are revealed. Heineken then presents them with two choices: stay and discuss their views over a beer or walk away. In the end, all three pairs decide to stay and talk over some Heineken beer.
Many media outlets have framed the Heineken ad as having succeeded where Pepsi failed. Fast Company’s headline called the ad “the antidote” to Pepsi’s. Adweek’s headline: “Hey Pepsi, Here’s How It’s Done. Heineken Takes On Our Differences, and Nails It.” The piece then goes on to call Heineken’s approach as “measured” and says, “It feels less like creepy money guys on high, fetishizing what matters to us.”
USA Today’s article also had a mainly positive take on the ad.
Others were more skeptical. A Vox piece highlights criticism on social media from both the self-described “alt-right” and those on the left, and ultimately concludes: “Beginning to solve the systemic problems that contribute to such strong ideological opposition will take far more than sharing a beer.”
And in a Salon.com piece, one writer suggests, “In general, companies should really think twice before trivializing marginalized people’s fight for livelihood in the name of selling, well, anything.”
