One of the core problems with whisk(e)y marketing is that it assumes that only men drink it. This is not true, as I know plenty of women who drink all different kinds of whiskies. But the liquor companies do no favors to these drinkers, usually relying on a chest-beating approach to getting the message across. The approach is not new, and the liquor companies seem content to plod along and drag their knuckles in to the media market.
So it's important to note when a company manages to cut through that white noise and touch a nerve. It happens, occasionally, and in the past it's washed over me without calling attention to the (obviously) effective method to get my attention. This is perfectly normal because I am not the liquor company's Target Market. That makes it especially important when I'm so affected that I actually comment on an ad campaign.
Congratulations, Hiram Walker. Your ad campaign for Canadian Club rose to the level that I and others have pilloried you for your misogynistic ads. A quick search of Google Blog search suggests a number somewhere north of 100 posts like this one that either claim your ads are awesome (usually by the chest-thumping demographic at the core of your target market), or are from the liquor writers who see through the smoke and understand your core message. Most of these are from October 2007 when you rolled this campaign out. While I did not post about it, I did agree with the latter category of writers.
But this isn't a post chiming in about why I hate the campaign. What drove me to make this commentary is that Hiram Walker is continuing the campaign. They've made new ads, one of which is on a couple of the bus shelters on my commute to work. This means that the ads are working, which is its own black eye on the drinking population.
No, this is (hopefully) a reasoned response to Hiram Walker. To answer the question: No, my dad did not drink it. Which is beside the second point: It doesn't matter.
My father, one of the early members of the baby boom generation, was a bartender before I was born. He was a good looking twenty-something in the sixties and could hold his liquor like the men you're identifying in your campaign. He drank whiskies, sure. But they were Seagrams or Jack Daniels. He also liked the sweetend ones, steering towards rock and rye or Southern Comfort. To his recollection, he never drank Canadian Club. The stuff never caught his interest.
But my dad was a bartender in the sixties. I write about liquor in the 21st century. Do you seriously think that an emotional draw to my father's heyday will convince me to buy your alcohol? Do you think that harkening to a time when secretaries were sex objects makes your product more relevant today? Do you really want your product to be a bigotry chaser?
These are the waning days of 2008, not the go-go days of 1968. People aren't drinking cloying brown liquors that have a kick and little else. Today's market is more diverse and interested in innovation rather than history. If you want to expand your market share, you have to show why your product is relevant today, rather than boosting sales to your traditional customers. Do you want new Canadian Club customers? Try selling on the merits of the product rather than seeking the drinker that wishes he didn't have the annual sexual harassment training.
On behalf of my father, let me say: Damn right, we don't drink it.
p.s. I like Wiser's. It's a more full-bodied whisky without that aggressive aftertaste of sexism.