The battle for Marmite liberation

This year, more than any other, we have seen social media platforms play an increasingly important role in providing a rallying point for struggles for freedom and fights against injustice.

The unprecedented interaction and participation that social networks enable can elevate causes in the public consciousness and even effect change. Let's take Marmite, for example.

Veering away from the much talked about Arab spring uprisings, let us turn our attention to another important battle for freedom spurred on by social media: the battle for the liberation of Marmite from harsh Danish health and safety legislation.

Let me explain: Last week, rumours emerged that Denmark had banned Marmite. Some called it a brave move to spite the British, others called it ludicrous, but the activity the rumour sparked on social media platforms was a testament to the power of the Marmite brand - love it or hate it. The outcry even rivalled that of the response to the potential banning of the burka.

The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration allegedly made the importation of Marmite illegal, on the grounds that the spread contains fortified B vitamins and, therefore, does not meet the strict Danish safety guidelines.

Marmite's Facebook presence moved quickly to spread word of the “injustice”. Its more than 660 000 fans were livid. They threatened retaliation through boycotting Lurpak butter, Danish bacon, biscuits in round tins, and Lego.

Marmite lovers spammed Danish Facebook pages with their outrage. Some even went so far as to post images of Lego pieces being threatened by Marmite. The anger was tangible.

The more placid of the Marmite mob simply devised strategies for the smuggling of the illegal substance to the needy in Denmark.

A video of a cute cat will go viral, while behind the scenes footage of abuse will remain virtually untouched.

Kathryn McConnachie, journalist, ITWeb

What started as an unwanted by-product of the brewing industry (and still is for many - notably the Danes) has since become one of the most divisive foodstuffs in history. To some it is disgusting, while for others it is a beloved and integral part of toast-eating and general snacking.

The genius of Marmite, however, lies in the way in which it has designed its entire marketing strategy around its divisiveness. The Danish ban essentially played directly into the hands of its marketers and their “spread the love” campaign.

Following the outcry from Marmite lovers around the world, the Danes quickly moved to clarify that Marmite is not banned per se; it must simply undergo the health and safety testing of the necessary authorities before being allowed to be sold.

Denmark previously banned 18 Kellogg products, including Special K and Rice Krispies for being enriched with iron, calcium and vitamins. No one seemed to want to wage a social media war against the Danes over cereal, however.

In contrast, lovers of Marmite rallied in various groups, such as The Marmite Resistance Movement, the Marmite International Liberation Front, Make the Danes Love Marmite - Stop the Danish and the International Marmite Liberation Army (For God, For England and For Marmite).

While the groups and the outrage are undoubtedly amusing, the Marmite social media movement does raise some interesting insights into online activism.

Speaking for myself as an activist, I both rejoice and despair in the era of “clicktivism”. Platforms such as Facebook allow disparate groups to connect and converge. They also afford the opportunity for people to be exposed to information that they would have never known otherwise.

They also, however, highlight how difficult it is for real causes to gain mass appeal - and to translate that into real action.

Few people are actually willing to throw themselves behind a cause and use their social profiles to truly engage with and participate in causes - unless they are firmly tongue in cheek and “laugh-out-loud” material.

They will support a Twitter hashtag campaign if it's already trending, they'll change their profile picture to an awareness ribbon for a day, but the majority will still not do much else.

While posts by Marmite updating its “troops” on the Danish ban will garner over 600 comments, an update on a rape trial or a plea for funding for an ailing animal shelter will only get a handful of responses. A video of a cute cat will go viral, while behind the scenes footage of abuse will remain virtually untouched.

Perhaps it is a testament to the fact that although social media is helping important causes to spread awareness and gain momentum, for the most part social platforms will always remain social first, and socially responsible, second.

People don't want to open their Facebook profile to be greeted by the destruction of the rainforest, animal abuse, human rights atrocities and global warming. They want to see what everyone is doing on Friday night, post funny pictures of Lego men being attacked by foodstuffs, and have a laugh at people planking in obscure places.

Of course, this is not true of everyone, nor every cause, but it is certainly something to be considered when devising a successful online strategy.

Social media offers great opportunities for both meaningless and meaningful causes and struggles. But perhaps the meaningful causes should take note of the strategies used by the less meaningful ones, to engage and excite followers.