Re: Dunkin Donut's Campaign - Thailand
Fiona van Iersel
MSc Marketing — King's College London
Module: International Marketing (7QQMO500X)
Date: 17 August 2025
https://keats.kcl.ac.uk/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=765972#p1681528

Re: Dunkin Donut's Campaign - Thailand
Submitted: 17 August 2025 11:03 PM

Nada, I think the donut people got lucky this time. 🍩 Aligning with the Queen’s birthday in Thailand was clever but also risky. If there’d been a real divide between loyalists and critics of the crown, Dunkin’ could’ve found itself in the middle of a political food fight instead of a parade. As de Mooij (2019) points out, when brands use cultural symbols without grasping the deeper political context, what feels like respect can quickly look like opportunism or taking a political position. Franklin, I don’t feel like being force fed politics with my donuts and coffee. Who is my donut place to tell me about politics.

We’ve seen what happens when brands wander into politics without a map. Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner ad (2017) tried to tap into protest culture but trivialised social justice movements by suggesting a soda could end systemic conflict it was pulled within 24 hours after global outrage (Vredenburg et al., 2020). Heineken’s Worlds Apart campaign (2017) paired people with opposing political views over beer; some praised the effort, but critics argued it oversimplified polarisation and turned serious divisions into a marketing stunt (Holt, 2004). Nike’s Kaepernick campaign (2018) won massive support among U.S. progressives and boosted sales, but it also triggered boycotts, shoe burnings, and lost favour in markets less sympathetic to politicised sport (Chaudhri, 2019). Bud Light’s 2023 partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney aimed to show inclusivity, but in the highly polarised U.S. climate it became a flashpoint in culture wars, leading to boycotts and double-digit sales declines (Business Insider, 2023). And Dolce & Gabbana’s ‘chopsticks’ ad in China (2018) mocked Chinese culture while the founders’ leaked comments insulted the country further; the result was celebrity boycotts, pulled retail partnerships, and near-collapse of the brand in its second-largest market (Zhou & Wong, 2019). I’m sure all of these had equally good intentions as Dunkin’ Donuts celebrating the queen.

Dunkin’ dodged all that here but it’s a reminder that once a product becomes political, you’re no longer just selling donuts, beer, or handbags put selling a political standpoint, and as Kotler and Keller (2016) warn, that’s one of the riskiest positions any brand can take the most importantly that’s a lot harder to swallow. What do you think? 374 words



References