Speech/Writing The Mother's Day marketing copy planned by mobile phone manufacturer OPPO has collapsed. In order to break the stereotype that "mothers only work hard for the family," the copy reads: "My mother has two 'husbands,' one is my father, and the other sees her twice a year. When she goes on dates with my father, she hardly dresses up, and when she meets the other, she wishes she could wear a wedding dress." The original intention was to use the meme of calling idols "husbands" in the fan circle to show that my mother also has her own love.

This has poked the hornet's nest. The copy quickly sparked intense controversy over "offending family ethics" and was quickly withdrawn. On May 11th, OPPO apologized again and announced the accountability results for this brand marketing incident.

From a business perspective, this is indeed not a good marketing strategy. It is a common practice in the fan circle to refer to idols as "husbands", but for outsiders who do not follow celebrities, it may take an explanation from the "class representative" to understand. A holiday marketing copy aimed at the general public, but with the addition of specific niche memes as a cognitive threshold, is itself a failure.

The copy that has been criticized by public opinion is just one of OPPO's Mother's Day series. The original intention of the plan is to use the camera to record the story of a mother who is not bound by stereotypes - there are more shots of mothers running marathons and mothers immersed in text creation. Looking at this set of pictures, there is no need to doubt the original intention of the brand, and the issue it wants to express also has social progress significance: loving a mother, supporting her to pursue love, and supporting her to be herself. But this copy itself made the mistake of confusing specific circles and public expression boundaries. Even if the word 'husband' is quoted, it is only suitable for joking in the private domain circle. Once it enters public expression and loses specific consensus and boundaries, it is indeed easy to misunderstand or feel offended, which is not appropriate.

For this copy, people naturally have the freedom to express their opposition; There are also some people who believe that the copy only borrows memes from the celebrity circle, and does not advocate infidelity to the family, so there is no need to go public - they also have the freedom to express their opinions. Public criticism, corporate apology, and copywriting retraction - if the story ends here, it is just a typical case of failed marketing, containing many valuable lessons for brand communication to reflect on, such as how brands can maintain their balance and avoid backlash in the era of traffic.

However, the subsequent development went from a simple marketing "crash" and derailed into an out of control multilateral public opinion hunt. On social media, the names, phone numbers, and social media accounts of the copywriting team employees involved have been publicly disseminated; The internal apology letter from the planning leader and the response from colleagues have been circulating online; The exposure of his Wuhan University alumni identity has led to a flood of online criticism turning towards the university; The statement released by the School of Literature at Wuhan University subsequently sparked a new round of public opinion

We often say 'right things, not people', but when the focus of public opinion shifts from discussing events to hunting individuals, it has already broken through the boundaries of legitimate criticism and developed towards the direction of 'unboxing' and 'cyberbullying'. Regardless of the success or failure of this copy, it is a product of the company's normal process of job behavior. We can judge works, but we cannot slide from public discussion to hunting down individual privacy and even alma mater under the guise of judging works. A university issuing a statement regarding the professional behavior of its graduating alumni should not be a norm, but the constantly spreading irrational attacks and connections behind it are also worthy of social vigilance.

Criticizing a marketing copy for offending public order and good customs, yet hunting down the parties involved in the form of human flesh and online bullying, is itself contrary to public order and good customs, and is also a form of losing control. This is undoubtedly a failed marketing plan that has had a huge negative impact on the brand. The company should apologize externally, reflect internally, and hold those responsible accountable. The parties involved should bear reasonable responsibility. However, if we have good intentions, especially from the perspective of ordinary people, their mistakes should not be subjected to public opinion torture or even social death, and they should not be severely punished due to public opinion trials.

The downfall of OPPO's copywriting lies in its lack of expression, and public discussions also need to maintain a sense of propriety: if criticism loses goodwill, it is easy to slide into the abyss. This tests the level of social civilization.