LOOK! Bud Light/Budweiser

“There’s two reasons that boycotts tend to be successful. The first is when it’s easy for consumers to switch to other brands. And it’s secondarily when people feel like they’re having an impact,” Frericks said. “And in this, Bud Light, it’s not very that much different than Coors Light or Miller Lite. It’s water, it’s barley, it’s hops. What sets it apart is its messaging. And so it’s easy for consumers to switch the grocery store, the convenience store, and… consumers feel like they’re having an impact.”

“What does Bud Light stand for? Bud Light… was a brand that was never about politics,” Frericks continued. “This is always about a brand that brought people together. It was about football, It was about sports. It was about music. It never got involved in political situations. That’s why it was enjoyed by both Republicans and Democrats equally, and that was what made the brand actually remarkable, is that it was remarkably unpolitical and this is just a political situation they should not have got themselves in.”

In the meantime, the company has since attempted to make amends with its customers. Bud Light marketing vice president Alissa Heinerscheid and Daniel Blake, who oversees marketing for Anheuser-Busch’s mainstream brands, both took a leave of absence after the backlash, particularly after Heinerscheid was caught in an interview blasting the brand as “fratty” with “out of touch humor.” A new country-based ad aired during the NFL Draft on April 27 as part of a new campaign.

The company has also attempted to contextualize the Mulvaney videos, explaining that a “third-party ad agency” was responsible for the collaboration with no intention to sell the can. Anheuser-Busch stated that the marketing firm has since been fired, though it declined to name the company.