Brand repulsion: consumers’ boundary work with rejected brands

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to conceptualize brand repulsion as a specific nuance of brand rejection, highlight the boundary work at play in situations of collective brand repulsion and extract implications for the brands that are at the centre of such situations and to delineate future directions for scholars.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors’ study of the “I Hate Apple” group on Facebook is grounded in a six-year long naturalistic enquiry designed to capture the boundary work performed by its members. The authors’ sources include netnographic data, online focus groups, observations and personal online correspondence with members and moderators.

Findings

This study’s findings reveal that certain brands serve the identity work of consumers by allowing them in erecting boundaries based on three major sources of repulsion: anti-fandom, anti-hegemony and anti-marketing. They show that for each type of boundary work, corporate and product brand repulsion seems prevalent.

Research limitations/implications

This research limits itself to considering the types of boundary work related to brand repulsion as regards a single brand: Apple.

Practical implications

The study can help managers identify the types(s) of boundary work related to their brand and it provides practical recommendations for these various sources of brand repulsion. It also helps them distinguish between consumer brand repulsion directed against their product and their corporation.

Originality/value

This study advances knowledge in the field of brand rejection by exploring a specific nuance: brand repulsion. Its close examination of consumer collective practices offers a deeper understanding of the ins and outs of the paradoxical phenomenon of repulsion/attraction for a brand. The cultural lens is used as an original approach to this under-investigated nuance of brand rejection.

Citation

Dessart, L. and Cova, B. (2021), "Brand repulsion: consumers’ boundary work with rejected brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 1285-1311. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0164