When it comes to politics and elections, brands must be careful to keep their involvement impartial, whether at party level or in communities.
Irene Gregory, CEO of IMM Institute, says brands must be careful to keep their involvement impartial, whether at party level or in communities (Image supplied)
Failure to do so can result in irreparable brand damage instead of the connections they are seeking to make between the company and the community that is their core audience.
Nike is a case in point. When it made former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick the face of its 30th anniversary campaign in 2018, it took a public stand against discrimination, attracting both support and criticism.
Research published in the Journal of Business Research in March 2026 argues that brands taking such stands need to demonstrate that their commitment is genuine, with researchers warning that taking any position can alienate consumers who disagree with it.
A second study, published in the Journal of Interactive Marketing in May 2026, found that social activism generally attracted more consumer engagement than political activism. However, political messages performed better when they came from brands perceived as competent in their field.
Consumers, the American Marketing Association research suggests, want brands to stand for something, but they are also wary of companies using social or political causes to sell products.
So what
At a time when many South Africans want municipalities that can reliably deliver basic services, maintain financially sustainable operations, provide a constant supply of water, and keep the lights on, voter apathy seems increasingly difficult to reconcile with the public’s expectations.
Yet this was what we saw in the 2024 elections, which recorded the lowest voter turnout in South Africa’s 30-year democratic history as just 58.6% of registered voters cast ballots, despite resulting in a widely welcomed Government of National Unity.
This contrasted both with the positive response from the investor markets – anticipating greater political stability, policy continuity and a more predictable environment from the Government of National Unity – and the turnout during the country’s first democratic election in April 1994, when 87% of eligible South Africans voted.
The difference seems to be that South Africans have become disconnected from politics and how it affects their daily lives. The South African Reconciliation Barometer’s 2023 research found that 47% of South Africans feel they are not qualified to participate in politics.
This Wednesday, turnout in the local government elections could be even lower, with an anticipated 42% according to calculations by Unisa’s Political Sciences Professor Dirk Kotzé in September, which can partially be attributed to apathy around Local Government Elections and an increasingly young base of voters.
Why business should care
Given this, there is an argument to be made that South African companies need to get involved in their communities to not only encourage citizens to make their voices heard but also to understand where the bottlenecks are between them and government.
This goes beyond donating money and business partnering with government in a bid to grow the economy, restore municipal services, improve infrastructure and governance, attract investment while developing a long-term economic vision for their communities.
It can be argued that companies have a democratic duty as part of their Socio-Economic Development Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment targets. What could be more developmental at a community level than empowering South Africans at the voting stations?
Some companies are already involved, but at party level.
The Independent Electoral Commission’s (IEC) first-quarter 2024/25 party-funding disclosure report records donations from five large companies totalling about R8.1m in cash and in-kind support. The money went to the ANC, DA, EFF, ACDP and IFP.
A further R25m from another company went into the IEC-administered Multi-Party Democracy Fund in May 2024 and was shared among parties represented in Parliament. These companies support multi-party democracy with money, yet this is largely out of public view and does little for their standing with the communities they serve.
Listen before you speak
For a brand to achieve consumer buy-in when taking a stance, even if it’s one that encourages voting, brands must listen before speaking.
An election gives companies a chance to understand what matters to the communities they serve, rather than broadcast messages at them.
That engagement has to continue after the election. A company that appears only in election season is tokenistic, while consistent investment in communities, whatever the political cycle, builds trust.
Being present in communities, without being intrusive, shows a company understands the daily realities of its customers. It does not need to announce that it is pro-democracy.
With environmental, social, and governance as well as social impact high on the corporate agenda, what companies hear on the ground can feed into strategy. Those that do this build loyalty and become partners in nation-building.
