ONTD Political

Chick-Fil-A's Brand Approval Rating Plummets After Anti-Gay Controversy

11:44 am - 07/31/2012
Chick-fil-A's anti-gay marriage stance has gotten some high-profile support by way of Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin and other conservative lawmakers. But among their longtime customers, it's a much different story.

Polling organization YouGov found that the Atlanta-based chain's brand approval ratings have plummeted in the wake of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy's controversial remarks earlier this month. YouGov also reports that the company's overall consumer brand health among fast food eaters has dropped to its lowest levels since mid-August 2010 in the wake of the media firestorm.

Just before Cathy's interview was published, Chick-fil-A's Index score was 65, well above the Top National Quick Service Restaurant (QSR) Sector average score of 46. Just four days later, however, Chick-fil-A's score had fallen to 47, while last week, the chain had a score of 39, compared to the Top National QSR Sector average score of 43.



Among the other brands ranked in the Top National QSR sector are Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, KFC, Burger King and McDonald's, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) noted.

Among those not surprised by the plunge was Aaron McQuade, Director of News and Field Media at GLAAD, who called the results "reflective of an America that values and respects its LGBT neighbors and rejects rhetoric like Dan Cathy's that seeks to demean and dehumanize the LGBT community."

"The business world has seen what happens when an organization supports the LGBT community -- which is that the LGBT community and its allies will support it," McQuade noted in a statement. "Now we have empirical proof of what happens when a company rejects the LGBT community. The LGBT community and its allies will reject it."

Although Chick-fil-A's financial contributions to anti-gay organizations like Exodus International and the Family Research Council have been well documented over the years, Cathy's somewhat glib confirmation of the reports ("Well, guilty as charged") in a July 16 Baptist Press interview has since sent both the media and a number of LGBT advocacy groups into overdrive.

"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit," Cathy said in that interview. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that...we know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

Since then, at least seven petitions have been launched on Change.org, a social activism site, demanding that universities across the country remove existing Chick-fil-A restaurants or prevent new ones from opening.

Mayors in Boston and San Francisco have also weighed in, telling the restaurant chain that they're not welcome in their cities, and the Jim Henson company, which had provided toys for Chick-fil-A kids' meals, announced that it would end its relationship with the company.


Source also has a video and a list of queer-friendly companies.

Tangentially: I am very pleased by the new trend to follow up reports of problematic companies/foods with positive alternatives. I hope it keeps up.
idemandjustice 1st-Aug-2012 04:31 pm (UTC)
Waffle fries are hardly unique to chick-fil-a.
flcadam 1st-Aug-2012 04:43 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I'm not completely familiar with the menu items of all the other fast food chains.

Another exhibit... I've been checking out the support on Facebook for Huckabee's Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day. I was skeptical that this event would be successful, but this even has over a half of a million attendees and over 3 million people invited. The wall is interesting because people are reporting on their visits to Chick-Fil-A today; seems like many stores are actually packed this morning.


http://www.facebook.com/events/266281243473841/


It seems like the backlash to Chick-Fil-A has really sparked something in a lot of people; I oddly saw a wall post from a liberal friend who was proclaiming his support for this event because of the free speech issue. I have a feeling that Chick-Fil-A is going to come out from this relatively unscathed.
idemandjustice 1st-Aug-2012 05:33 pm (UTC)
I fear you're right that they're probably not going to hurt too badly over this.

The "free speech" issue annoys the crap out of me. It always seems, ironically, to be brought up as a way of silencing dissent.
flcadam 1st-Aug-2012 05:44 pm (UTC)
Yeah, this particular event highlights why I've always laughed at libertarians who believe that boycotting is a substitute for government oversight. Most consumers are completely expendable once to major corporations. Chick-Fil-A isn't even a multinational corporation and they're immune to the attitudes of US consumers.
idemandjustice 1st-Aug-2012 05:56 pm (UTC)
I did hear an interesting suggestion on the radio a few days ago (It was the Gloria Neal show on AM 760 in Denver). She thought it might be a good idea for individual Chick-Fil-A franchise owners to sue Dan Cathy for hurting their sales. Of course, that would only work if they actually do lose a significant amount of business, but it was an interesting idea, I thought.
flcadam 1st-Aug-2012 06:01 pm (UTC)
That would be interesting to see if a franchise owner would actually do that. However, I recall reading that Chick-Fil-A has a unique franchising system where they actually retain a great deal of control over their stores, so I wonder if this arrangement would reduce their liability.

idemandjustice 1st-Aug-2012 10:42 pm (UTC)
I had not been aware of that!
thelastpen 1st-Aug-2012 08:25 pm (UTC)
Just for the record, but not all libertarians believe that boycotting is a suitable substitute for government oversight. I, for one, certainly don't. I do believe in restricting the federal government to the limits written into the Constitution and Bill of Rights and for people to take personal responsibility for their own actions/lives instead of relying on others, but neither of those things are resolvable via boycott or government oversight.

The government has a role to play in regulating corporations and trade - food safety and worker safety in this example. However, I fail to see what that role is in regards to a CEO shooting off his mouth and displaying his bigotry for all to see and thus why that comment of yours about libertarians had anything to do with the topic. I'd love to know what the point of the dig at libertarians was though.
flcadam 2nd-Aug-2012 02:45 am (UTC)
Yeah, I think that living out west, I just happen to encounter more people on the extreme side of the liberty spectrum. The type who advocate for private roads, philanthropy to cover cancer care, the abolishment of public schools, etc. I think the main problem is that many people jump into libertarianism without reviewing the philosophies that influence this ideological stance.

I wasn't "digging" at libertarians. I used to be president of a libertarian social organization and generally agree with them ideologically. I was making a statement that boycott as a form of political protest is usually ineffective, especially in today's economic climate. It might be gratifying to the individual, but the idea that one's dollar is like their vote doesn't hold up.
This page was loaded May 23rd 2013, 2:52 am GMT.