Heineken Thrown to the Dogs

Over the past week or so, an image has been circulating social media sites depicting Heineken beer banners hanging over a gruesome, violent, disgusting dog fight. Apparently, the dog fight took place in a nightclub in Mongolia couple of years ago.

Naturally, when this image started circulating "virally," as pictures and videos and stories often do these days, it was met with aggressive calls for boycotts on Heineken beer...with all of the usual venom and vigor of any good call for justice, redemption, or consequence.

After the dust settled, however, we Facebookers, Tweeters, and Bloggers were surprised to learn that the Heineken brand had been badly misrepresented, unfairly condemned, wrongly portrayed. It seems that it was all just an innocent misunderstanding. Heineken was quick to call "foul," writing on every social media site on which they could think to write that the Heineken banners were not there to sponsor a dog fight, that they were there for a "promotional event" held the night before, that they were just as "shocked and disappointed by the images" as was the general public, and that they were the innocent victims of wrongful accusation. Heineken assured its loyal customer base that they can trust in their favorite beverage company's social awareness and sensitivity.

Heineken further promised to end any association with this Mongolian nightclub. End of story. ...Or is it?

No matter how hard I try, I just cannot keep myself from wondering why Heineken, certainly a billion + dollar company, would be so careless as to "unintentionally" leave it's banners all over a seedy looking nightclub in Mongolia which doubles as a dog-fighting "pit." Something's not adding up here. Now, of course Heineken has done their due diligence after the fact, as is all too often the case. But, why didn't they choose to be as thorough before the fact? Why didn't they make sure their banners were not completely blanketing a pit bull fight arena during a pit bull fight?

I guess I do believe Heineken when they say they did not knowingly "sponsor" a pit bull fight with their hanging banners...just as I would believe a convicted drunk driver who said he did not intentionally hit an innocent pedestrian with his automobile. The driver who had been heavily drinking, however, is guilty just the same.

Heineken may not be guilty of intentionally (and I use the word "intentionally" purposefully, so as to show that, although they may not have wanted to sponsor the event, their beer banners were hanging for all those patrons to see and, perhaps, respond to in their beer choice during the night of dog fights) sponsoring illegal and brutal and disgusting dog fights. However, they are guilty of careless, thoughtless, and misguided opportunism. You see, whether or not they wanted to adorn that classy nightclub (which I'm sure hosted something brilliant such as the Mongolian Grammy's or the Mongolian Oscars the night before), with their many brilliant banners during dog fights, their banners did adorn that classy nightclub during dog fights. The message of "drink Heineken" rang out to all who watched with eager anticipation to see which dog would viciously tear apart the other.

Heineken may not be "as" guilty as we thought three or four days ago. They are certainly not, however, "as" innocent as they are now claiming to be...over the same social networks that caused the commotion in the first place.