Pepsi Kendall Jenner Commercial:

Crisis Communications Management Case Study

Maria Ramirez
BACKGROUND: Pepsi Co and Kendall Jenner
Pepsi Co, Inc. is one of the largest food and beverage companies in the world with

products in over 200 countries. The company was first created in the 1890s when Caleb

Bradham, a pharmacist from North Carolina, recreated the popular flavor of Coca Cola.

The company’s success continued as it merged with other companies like Frito Lay.

Early in the 21st century, Pepsi Co expanded its operations in other countries specifically

in Russia which is now its second largest market. Today, the company reports sales of $510

million and has 19,000 employees. Pepsi even has an in house video production company,

the Creator’s League, which has been behind many of the brand’s marketing successes as

well as one of it’s largest crises.

Kendall Jenner is a famous American model who rose to fame because of her family.

The Kardashian’s have been the protagonists of their own reality television show, “Keeping

Up With The Kardashians,” since 2007. Jenner has almost 27 million followers on Twitter and

more than 96 million followers on Instagram. Her fame has made her an influential celebrity

and many brands use her as a spokesperson.

ADVERTISEMENT CRISIS
On April 4, 2017 Pepsi Co launched an advertisement titled “Live for now,” the 2

minute video was created by the company’s in house video production company, Creator’s

League. Accompanying the release of the video, VP of global brand development, Kristin

Patrick, and Brad Jakeman, president of the Global Beverage Group at PepsiCo, made

public statements sharing their pride for the advertisement.

01
 The video uses imagery from Black Lives Matters and Anti-Trump protests as

multicultural groups march on the streets. Kendall Jenner is in the middle of a photo shoot

while the protest is happening. Eventually, Jenner leaves the photoshoot and walks to a row

of police officers barring the protestors. Jenner hands an officer a can of Pepsi as a peace

offering and the protest is dismantled as both protesters and police officers celebrate.

Within a few hours of its launch, the advertisement became a trending topic on

social media. Human rights activists and celebrities took to social media to discuss their

disapproval of the advertisement. In the first 48 hours, the video received 1.6 million views

with five times more dislikes than likes. On the day the advertisement launched, Pepsi’s

social media mentions went up by 7,000% and the brand was mentioned one million times

across Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. While the brand received a lot of coverage both

on social media and on traditional media, the coverage was disproportionately negative.

According to Ad Age, 77% of digital content engagement around the term ‘tone deaf’

mentioned Pepsi and Kendall Jenner.

COMPANY’S COMMUNICATIONS
When the advertisement began receiving backlash, Pepsi Co chose to defend the

video. In a statement to Ad Week, Pepsi said the advertisement reflected “people from

different walks of life coming together in a spirit of harmony.” Failing to acknowledge their

mistake only boosted the distaste for Pepsi. Negative comments and posts on social media

regarding the video and the company continued to roll in.

02
 Seeing as the original strategy of defending the advertisement was unsuccessful,

Pepsi Co took to Twitter to issue an apology. Pepsi’s main Twitter account posted a message

acknowledging their mistake, saying they “missed the mark” and “did not intend to make

light of any serious issue.” In this message they also said they would remove the video and

stop any further rollout of the content. In addition, they ended the message by apologizing

to Kendall Jenner for putting her in that position.

ANALYSIS OF PEPSI’S CRISIS MANAGEMENT

critical of the way in which the company managed this crisis and the methods they used can

aid other brands and communicators when they run into similar issues.

Acknowledging mistakes and acting quickly to remove advertisements is important when

dealing with crises. Pepsi should have immediately taken responsibility for its actions and

acted proactively to remove the advertisement promptly.

It’s important for brands to take responsibility right off the bat, rather than defend

their actions and wait for increased backlash to correct their mistakes. Timeliness is a priority

in any communications crisis; however, this cannot come at the cost of making sound and

well thought out decisions. While Pepsi tried to act quickly to fix its mistake, not taking the

time to acknowledge the best method of doing so forced them to take back their original

defensive statement in order to issue an apology.

03
 Brands should have crisis communications plans established before a crisis occurs,

and while they should act in a timely manner they must also be critical about how they move

forward in a situation.

While Pepsi did not immediately take the video down and apologize, it is also

important to acknowledge the positive aspects of its response. According to Crenshaw

Communications, the brand did not “challenge those who criticized, suggest they might be

overreacting, or point fingers at anyone but their own team.” When responding to a crisis

where customers have been offended, brands should take full responsibility and apologize

for their actions rather than apologize for offending their customers. In its statement, Pepsi

explicitly acknowledged “missing the mark” and expressed that their intentions were not

“to make light of any serious issue.” While it can be difficult to acknowledge mistakes, it is

often simpler to admit to a fault.

Not only did Pepsi admit to its mistake eventually, but it also took action for it. “One

rule of good reputation management is to “fix” or solve a potentially damaging problem, or

pledge to do so as quickly as possible” Crenshaw Communications said. Pepsi did this by

explaining that they would take down the video and halt any further rollout of the “Live for

Now” campaign. By making a concrete decision to take down the video and taking action to

stop any further showing of the campaign, Pepsi was able to establish itself as dynamic and

effective in the face of a crisis.

04
 One addition to Pepsi’s statement that did not help the brand was the decision to

personally apologize to Kendall Jenner. In their message, Pepsi said, “we also apologize

for putting Kendall Jenner in this position.” This language led to more backlash against

the brand from offended activists. In an article by the Washington Post, Danielle Parquette

compiled multiple tweets and comments by activists and scholars reprimanding Pepsi for

this choice. Many said it was Jenner’s decision to be in the advertisement and that she was

paid for her appearance. Susan Akens, an entertainment law professor at the UCLA School

of Law said “Pepsi might have decided to apologize from a public relations standpoint.”

Or that “Jenner’s team could have also demanded the words of remorse to maintain their

relationship.” Whatever the reason may have been, it might have been better for Pepsi

not to directly apologize to Jenner. Or to at least acknowledge the groups they personally

offended in the advertisement for example, human rights activists or minority groups.

All in all, Pepsi’s crisis communication and management was not perfect, but it

also wasn’t detrimental to the brand. In the future, it is beneficial for Pepsi to have a

planned crisis communications strategy for situations like this one. Having this setup will

prevent them from making rash decisions like defending the advertisement. In addition,

it is important that there is an established agreement with celebrities about the way their

image will be managed in the event of this kind of backlash. Finally, it is imperative that

communications teams be diverse and representative of the customers they are trying

to appeal to. Ensuring this will diminish the risk of an advertisement that is blatantly

stereotypical, trivializing or racist from being published.

05
RESULTS
There isn’t a clear consensus over the effect this scandal had on Pepsi’s customers

brand perception. According to a poll conducted by Morning Consult, the advertisement

did not have a detrimental impact on Pepsi’s brand perception. Around half of those

surveyed said the commercial did not impact their purchasing decisions of Pepsi. 44%

of people had a more favorable view of Pepsi after viewing the commercial. However,

According to YouGov, “It took nine months for Pepsi’s perception to fully recover with

millennials from the ad’s backlash.” The advertisement made Pepsi’s Purchase Consideration

score with millennials decrease “from 27% to 24% from early April to mid-July.” The brand’s

perception was at a trough level between May and July of 2017, “the lowest it had been

in at least eight years. It then rose back to where it was pre-crisis, something that happens

very infrequently after a calamity.” This could be because of the way in which Pepsi handled

the crisis. One year after the scandal, Pepsi’s brand perception is “at its lowest level in three

years.” Conclusions about this being caused by the Pepsi advertisement cannot be made;

however, it is possible that there is a correlation.

06
CONCLUSION
The way in which Pepsi handled this crisis had both positives and negatives. Overall,

it is important for brands to have crisis teams and plans before a calamity occurs. It is also

recommended for brand’s to act quickly; however, this cannot be done at the cost of making

rash decisions that need to be corrected later. Pepsi should have established the best

method of proceeding with the crisis rather than immediately defending it.

The company also made the mistake of having a monogamous group that was

incapable of preventing the crisis. Because of this, ensuring diverse representation in teams

should be a priority. However, Pepsi did apologize in the end and took action by taking

down the video. Overall the crisis, was handled in a mostly effective and positive way, and

did not have a drastic impact on the brand’s perception.

07
SOURCES
PepsiCo, Inc., Encyclopedia Britannica

Our History, Pepsi Co.

Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner ad: Mistake or subversive strategy?, LA Times

How Three Brands Recovered from PR Crises: United, Pepsi, Uber, Glean Info

Pepsi’s Smart esponse to its PR Controversy, Crenshaw Communications

One year after Jenner ad crisis, Pepsi recovers but purchase consideration hasn’t, YouGov

PepsiCo Takes a Sip of Reality, Arthur W. Page Society

Pepsi Co Study, Morning Consult

Pepsi apologizes to Kendall Jenner for decision she made and got paid for, The Washingon

Post

Pepsi is Pulling Its Widely Mocked Kendall Jenner Ad, Ad Age

Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner Ad Was So Awful It Did The Impossible: It United The Internet, Wired

Kendall Jenner, Twitter

Kendall Jenner, Instagram

08