Less than a week before the end of lockdown, we decided to look into the analysis of opinion in the face of publications announcing the manufacture of hydroalcoholic gels and masks for hospitals. Indeed, the question of answering an “essential need” contrasts sharply with the emotional aspect of a luxury product. We therefore analyzed nearly 30,000 comments on social networks (LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook) in reaction to these publications, coming from both the LVMH group (group and houses involved such as Dior, Louis Vuitton, Bvlgari, Givenchy...), but also from eco, fashion and general public media.
Publications advertising a luxury product that is accessible to a minority never leave opinion indifferent: emotional reactions, admiration for the product and the house, but also criticism of the luxury industry (discrepancy with material problems, accusations of tax evasion, notion of worldliness denounced).
So what were the reactions to a more “humanist”, rational and materialistic message? Luxury, usually playing on dreams, rarity, expectations, the inaccessible, comes in this period of crisis to focus on reactivity, mass production and distribution. He is where he is not expected.
A reaction from audiences that was mostly positive, but divided
[caption id="attachment_4276" align="aligncenter” width="1400"]
10 types of reactions differ from the analysis of comments [/caption]
We observe a majority of positive comments about the group (42%), corresponding to 4 different types. Nearly 14% mention the great initiative of LVMH, in which solidarity, commitment and generosity are praised. More than 12% of the comments speak of the pride of Internet users in relation to this initiative of the French group (pride in being a customer, an LVMH employee or simply French). 9.6% are thanks to the group in the face of this gesture. Finally, 6.4% represent messages of admiration addressed to the various houses involved.
On the other hand, nearly 31% of all comments are negative. The audience expresses its doubts and concerns about the free distribution of gels and masks to hospitals and the distribution of gels and masks: will the staff really be able to benefit from them?
Nearly 9% of the comments are questions concerning compliance with mask standards. Are they fashion/luxury products or are they standard masks that guarantee the safety of those who wear them? This point raises the paradox between luxury goods and basic necessities. Moreover, the audience evokes the design and aesthetics of the mask: will the famous monogram be present? Will style be valued more than its use and effectiveness? In addition, 3.7% raise the ambiguity of products without dissociating them from their belonging to the luxury sector. The words “bottles”, “luxury gels”, and “luxury masks” are quoted. These products “will be expensive again later” according to the comments. These two typologies show us that the product is not understood by more than one in ten people.
6.3% of the opinion is a criticism of the group. This type of comment denounces tax havens, tax evasion and the wealth of the group. Bernard Arnault also comes up relatively often in these negative comments.
Around 15% of the reactions are exchanges between defenders of LVMH and detractors.
Finally, we observe a very distinct category representing nearly 12% of comments: this is a manifestation of a strong need. This typology is different, because it does not relate to luxury, and remains far from the imaginary to which it relates (rarity, price, admiration). These comments express a desire to meet essential needs (“SVP”, “We need them”). It responds directly to the responsiveness and mobilization of LVMH teams. We are seeing feedback from both a general audience and from the health care staff. It is a typology that focuses on concrete and material problems.
Mapping comment types
During this analysis, we mapped the different types of reactions. It highlights the rational/irrational aspects that we were able to mention during this article (rationality of a basic necessity product vs irrationality, emotional and imaginary relating to luxury). This mapping also raises the “pros” LVMH and the more neutral, even negative, reactions to what the group is talking about.
[caption id="attachment_4280" align="aligncenter” width="1200"]
Mapping the 10 types of comments [/caption]
To remember
- 42% of the comments are positive and relate to the beauty of the initiative, are the subject of thanks and speak of the pride of having a link with the group (customers, employees, French nationality).
- Nearly 31% of the reactions are negative and evoke doubts concerning the free products and their standards (safety issue), the ambiguity relating to the value of “luxury” bottles/gels and masks, as well as the controversies concerning the group's taxation.
- Almost 12% of the comments are distinguished by the absence of notions of luxury and by their rationality. These are reactions expressing a very concrete and material concern for needs, in total contrast to the imaginary and discussions/controversies aroused by the controversial luxury sector.
- A very revealing mapping highlighting two opposing aspects: emotional/imaginary very strong within luxury opposing a rational and material aspect. Comments in favor of luxury values are also opposed to more critical comments (price, wealth, valued design vs. functionality).
What “for actions” should we give to this study?
We observe that it is therefore essential to make audiences understand that the notion of rarity associated with luxury is exceptionally absent. The products have no other purpose than to be functional, regulated, and standard in order to be distributed to a greater number.
It is also important to emphasize the work of valuing teams, in order to be able to associate LVMH with its employees, and not with an untouchable entity or with the group making the most profits in France (example of the post from the Instagram account @givenchybeauty).
Nevertheless, the publications must highlight the fact that the values linked to know-how and precision present in the houses of a luxury group are mobilized for the benefit of efficiency, in order to mass produce quality products that meet safety standards. The requirements of luxury are therefore absolutely not incompatible with the production of a basic necessity product. On the contrary, its manufacture must all the more inspire confidence. This notion of trust is also expressed implicitly in the 42% of positive comments (left part of the mapping).
Finally, the discourse must also focus on the reactivity of these qualified teams, who are able to adapt to a crisis context in order to manufacture products that have nothing to do with their preferred sector.
