I am embarking on my 12th year as the communications director for the American Sugar Alliance. And over that time, a reoccurring question I field from growers is, “Why is agriculture losing touch with its customer base?”
It’s a poignant question and understanding it will be imperative as the industry deals with pressing issues like GMOs and obesity. The stand-by answer used by most (including myself until just recently) is the often-repeated refrain, “America is three, going on four, generations removed from the farm. Urbanites simply don’t understand. A lot of them probably think food comes from the grocery store.”
That line has gone largely unchallenged over the years, and growers seem to accept it with relief. Almost as if to say, “So, it’s their fault and there’s not much I can do about it.”
But that answer is insulting. A good businessperson knows that it’s never the customer’s fault and essentially calling them too stupid to understand is problematic.
Not to mention, that answer is incorrect. With the rise of “foodie networks” and farmers markets, it could be argued that consumers have never felt so connected to their food.
The real answer is far more complicated. So complicated that explaining it in one column would be impossible, which is why I will dedicate my next several pieces to the question of why agriculture is losing touch and what can be done about it.
My theory is that the disconnection between growers and their end consumers is the result of the convergence of three forces: generational changes, media transformation and the rise of something called pathological science. Those three issues, mixed together, have created an almost impossible situation where fact and reason are losing out to fear and opportunism.
In this column, we’ll explore differences in the generations, which are a lot more complex than stereotypes and quips about participation trophies and an honest day’s work. There are real differences between the way Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials act; how they receive and process information; and what motivates them to purchase products.
The Baby Boomer generation (born 1946 to 1964) has been described by marketing experts as self-righteous, willing to spend money on themselves, and generally trusting of business, government and a hierarchical structure. Most received—and still get—information from newspapers and the nightly news. Members of this generation are more likely to be social and tend to surround themselves with likeminded people.
That’s a marketer’s dream. A huge population pool that has money, likes brand names, seeks convenience, trusts the messages they receive and can be easily reached through traditional advertising and word-of-mouth channels.
But as more and more Baby Boomers retire, Gen X (born 1965 to 1980) is rising in prominence and proving to be a much tougher nut to crack. The “MTV generation” that witnessed the birth of video games, cable television and the Internet has been described in college-level marketing classes as being individualistic and untrusting of the establishment—so-called slackers who felt like they were unfairly criticized and have been on the outside looking in.
How do you connect with a consumer who is skeptical of the establishment and distrustful of most of what they hear?
That’s a real challenge, but so far aggies have applied a one-size-fits-all approach to Xers and Boomers alike. Big mistake.
As if things weren’t challenging enough, enter the Millennial generation (born 1981 to 2000). These young adults have growing purchasing power and influence, and their importance will only increase as they replace older consumers who are aging out of the marketplace.
Millennials have been pegged by marketers as kids raised by omnipresent parents with big expectations, who were taught to be very assertive and very active. This generation is also far more likely to be homebound considering the economic difficulties they’ve experienced and the rise in stay-at-home parents and telecommuters.
Again, this presents a big communications challenge. It’s hard to engage young people who have unlimited data at their fingertips, are home more often to access that data, believe that they are always right and feel real pressure to change the world for the better.
So what can agriculture better do to meet these challenges?
That’s a question we’ll tackle in a later column. But suffice it to say, the agricultural community cannot keep communicating like it did 20 years ago. Old-school press releases and traditional advertising aren’t cutting it anymore.
Stay tuned.
Editor’s note: Hayes is the director of media relations for the American Sugar Alliance. Email him at phillip@sugaralliance.org.