Great Northern Brewing has officially halted its controversial campaign to support national parks after facing mounting backlash from its customer base. The campaign, which aimed to match donations of up to $200,000 for the Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife, sparked outrage among beer drinkers who accused the company of 'going woke'.
The brewing company launched its "Outdoors for a Cause" campaign on January 15, seeking to raise funds for the establishment of new national parks. Unfortunately for Great Northern, the move quickly drew ire from four-wheel-drive enthusiasts and outdoor advocates who felt it threatened the accessibility of state forests.
Critics expressed concern over the perceived shift from state forests, which allow for more recreational activities, to the more restrictive policies associated with national parks. A post from the popular Facebook community 4WD TV labeled the campaign as "absolutely disgraceful," calling for supporters to boycott the brand. "Great Northern Brewing has gone woke with this campaign to help get us locked out of forests," the post stated, undermining the company's connection to its traditional outdoorsy customer base.
Social media personalities added to the uproar, with users like Marcus Sutherland posting videos of themselves destroying cans of Great Northern beer. Sutherland commented, "What the bloody hell is Great Northern thinking, backing up the idea of locking up the bush? It's only going to cause more fuel for bigger fires." His sentiments echoed those of other angry customers who claimed they would never drink the brand again, branding it as out of touch with its primary demographic.
Responding to the backlash, Zac Gelman, head of marketing for Great Northern, issued a statement. "Great Northern’s Outdoors for a Cause campaign was paused following feedback from our passionate drinkers. Our donation to the Foundation for National Parks & Wildlife will now not be used to buy land to add to national parks. Our donation will instead be used for the preservation of endangered species," he said.
They had set out to support environmental causes but faced substantial opposition from those who believe the campaign undermines their outdoor activities. "I am against changing what we already have governed as state forests to national parks," Sutherland added, stressing the importance of maintaining access to those spaces. The pushback from customers indicates Great Northern underestimated the level of support for state forest advocacy within their consumer base.
Leonie Blackwell, who runs the Facebook page 'Victorians Against the Great Forest National Park', mentioned, "It's really disappointing...major companies like this are blindly buying... without really assessing its full impact." She added, "They're trying to look good but need to have a much bigger vision than just trying to look cool and trendy."
Reflecting on the situation, Simon Christie of 4WD TV proudly claimed responsibility for the campaign's pause, stating, "I'm pretty proud to say we had overwhelming impact. It's the old go-woke, go-broke thing." He elaborated, indicating the controversy highlighted broader tensions between conservation priorities and recreational access for Australians.
Despite this backlash, the Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife stated its commitment to protecting native biodiversity and creating new national parks—efforts seen as important by many nature enthusiasts. Spokesperson Jordan Crook argued, "This again seems like...a very small and entitled group of people." He emphasized national parks preserve Australia’s natural beauty and secure environments against exploitation.
Many believe the creation of national parks is integral to preserving Australia’s unique ecosystems, and public sentiment tends to support these initiatives. Polling data shows significant backing for national parks, with as much as 84 percent of Victorians acknowledging their importance.
Although Great Northern raised only $2,286 for its cause before abandoning the campaign, the broader discourse reveals significant discontent around the balance between environmental activism and recreational enjoyment. It also shows how consumer preferences can drastically influence corporate policies, especially when those preferences are tied closely to identity and lifestyle.
This incident not only poses challenges for Great Northern but also ignites questions on how companies engage with political and environmental causes. The precarious intersection of consumer culture and activism remains highly sensitive, especially when it challenges established recreational practices.
The decision to abandon the campaign serves as cautionary advice to companies entering the environmental activism arena without fully gauging public sentiment. Great Northern, once hailed as Australia’s second most-consumed beer, now faces the task of rebuilding trust among its drinkers, who have made it clear where they stand on these contentious issues.