And then there is the thorny issue of consistency. As well as a brand’s political stance needing to sit in familiar territory, it also needs to be consistent.

A brand’s allegiances may be tested at times. By aligning with one thing, it means the brand is against something else. What we saw with the controversy around Bud Light’s collaboration with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney was that the minute there was a backlash to its partnership, the brand walked away. Its flip-flopping did more damage than taking a side.

The truth is that in our politicized world, brands must become comfortable with losing the support of some customers—and maybe even employees—because of allegiances.

Election fever 

Around elections, consumer behavior changes—emotions are heightened, the political feels personal, and the impact on people’s lives seems greater. That creates an opportunity for brands to really connect with their customers, to tap into a sense of unity and urgency.

Brand activism may not be for everyone, but Gen Z is much more aware and desiring of a brand to take a stance. Gen Z is on everyone’s radar, politicians and brands alike—see Kamala Harris’ marketing strategy including her Brat Summer TikToks.

To keep the power brokers of the future on their side, brands need to choose a clear direction and commit to it.