Inclusive language in brand communication
Why this is a revenue issue, not politeness
Gender-neutral fragrance CK Everyone in the first quarter of 2021 gave Calvin Klein a business growth of 65% and an increase in international revenues by 91% — the figures soared not because of a lucky slogan, but because the brand closed a demand that competitors ignored. Bic conducted its own study before launching the Made FOR YOU razor and received the result: 67% of people 18–24 years old want gender-neutral personal care products. This is a market description, not a PR department's social agenda.
A reverse example is Gillette's 'The Best Men Can Be' campaign in 2019: audience reaction was polarized, the video garnered a record number of dislikes on YouTube among brand advertisements, and in the same year P&G wrote off Gillette's value by 8 billion dollars — not only because of the campaign, but it became a symbol of how a misstep in a sensitive topic can amplify already weak financial positions of the brand. Dove had the opposite story: in the first years of the Real Beauty campaign, brand revenue grew from 2,5 to 4 billion dollars — inclusivity in the visual line here worked directly for sales, not as an image gesture.
Three layers that make up inclusive content
Reducing the topic to formulations is a methodological error that most content teams make. Inclusivity begins to work only when all three layers are simultaneously closed.
- Visual series. Different types of figures, age, visible and invisible forms of disability, different family configurations. Target and Old Navy introduced size ranges for mannequins from XS to 4XL right in the retail space — not in a separate 'special' collection, but in the main display.
- Language and tone. Gender-neutral formulations, refusal of euphemisms, orientation on self-designations of groups rather than on 'safe' words invented by the editor.
- Physical accessibility. Alt-texts for images, subtitles for videos, text contrast no lower than WCAG AA, adaptation for screen readers and mobile screens.
A brand that corrected its language but released a video without subtitles and with gray text on a white background closed one-third of the task and continues to lose audience with hearing or vision impairments — and this is not a marginal group, but millions of potential buyers.
How to speak about people with disabilities and the LGBT+ community without falsity
There is no universal correct option — there are two competing approaches, and the choice depends on the specific group.
| Approach | Example formulation | When it works |
|---|---|---|
| Person-first (person-first) | “person with autism”, “person with disability” | Most groups with acquired or mental disabilities |
| Identity-first (identity-first) | “autistic”, “deaf”, “blind” | Deaf and blind communities tend to perceive identity as part of themselves, not as a diagnosis that needs to be softened |
Here there is a reverse trap: overly ‘sterile’ formulations such as ‘people with special needs’ instead of direct ‘disability’ are perceived as patronizing, not diplomatic. The only reliable guide is self-designations used by the group itself in its own public materials, not what seems safe to a staff copywriter.
Why the same text is safe in one country and toxic in another
The Italian coffee brand Chicco d'Oro used the slogan 'Jedem das Seine' in 2024 year — a neutral phrase for the Italian linguistic field. In the German context, it is directly associated with the inscription on the gates of the Buchenwald concentration camp. This is not a translator's error, but a failure of the process: the slogan was approved without verification by a native speaker with an understanding of the historical context of the market.
The gender structure of languages varies radically: in some, grammatical gender exists for professions and nouns, in others it does not, and a literal 'gender-neutral translation' is sometimes physically impossible without rewriting the phrase entirely. Additionally, cultural context affects tone.
| Type of culture | Examples of markets | What this means for brand tone |
|---|---|---|
| High-context | Japan, China, Arab countries, Russia | Direct formulations on sensitive topics sound crude; circumlocutory, veiled tone works |
| Low-context | Germany, Scandinavian countries, USA | Directness is valued, evasiveness is read as insincerity or avoidance of the topic |
Practical conclusion: a single global style guide for inclusive language does not work physically. A basic document with principles is needed — respect for self-designations, rejection of stereotypical scenarios — and regional add-ons that are checked by the language speaker immersed in the local historical context.
Why brands simultaneously lose 50+ and youth
Age discrimination in communication works in both directions at once, and this is rarely recognized within one team. On one hand, advertising almost always shows people 25–40 years old as the only 'normal' audience — meanwhile, the 50+ generation in developed countries controls more than 70% of disposable income and remains almost invisible in the frame, except for drug and insurance ads. On the other hand, youth is lost through outdated perceptions of 'seriousness' of the brand, which do not match how the young audience talks about itself in its own social networks.
The solution is not about adding one elderly character to a video just for the sake of it. A redesign of the product usage scenarios is needed: a non-parental guardian, an older person as an active user of a tech product, not as a victim of the digital divide, a singleton without a 'typical' family in the frame. Real diversity of scenarios, not a showcase from one demographic group — that is what simultaneously reaches both audiences.
How to embed this into the workflow, not keep it in one editor's head
Inclusivity ceases to be a source of risk only when it is embedded in the content approval process, rather than relying on the memory of a specific individual.
- To record in the brand's style guide a list of accepted terms and prohibited formulations, along with justification for each item — a list of 'do nots' without explanation does not work in practice.
- To add mandatory text verification using tools such as Grammarly or LanguageTool at the time of publication — these tools catch unintended formulations that the author's eye misses after the third revision.
- Include a clause about inclusive language in contracts with influencers and agencies: most reputation failures occur in partner content that was never checked before publication.
- Test localized versions of text with a native speaker immersed in the historical context of the market — not just a translator who translates words, not meanings.
- Test the visual content scenario before filming: who is in the frame, what roles, what family configuration — fixes at the script stage cost orders of magnitude less than at the post-production stage.
A common mistake of content teams is treating inclusive language as a one-time project: updated the guidelines, problem solved. In practice, self-designated group names change every few years, and a formulation acceptable three years ago now sounds outdated or patronizing. Annual guideline revision costs less than one public scandal of the level of Chicco d'Oro or Gillette.
Why this is a revenue issue, not politeness
Gender-neutral fragrance CK Everyone in the first quarter of 2021 gave Calvin Klein a business growth of 65% and an increase in international revenues by 91% — the figures soared not because of a lucky slogan, but because the brand closed a demand that competitors ignored. Bic conducted its own study before launching the Made FOR YOU razor and received the result: 67% of people 18–24 years old want gender-neutral personal care products. This is a market description, not a PR department's social agenda.
A reverse example is Gillette's 'The Best Men Can Be' campaign in 2019: audience reaction was polarized, the video garnered a record number of dislikes on YouTube among brand advertisements, and in the same year P&G wrote off Gillette's value by 8 billion dollars — not only because of the campaign, but it became a symbol of how a misstep in a sensitive topic can amplify already weak financial positions of the brand. Dove had the opposite story: in the first years of the Real Beauty campaign, brand revenue grew from 2,5 to 4 billion dollars — inclusivity in the visual line here worked directly for sales, not as an image gesture.
Three layers that make up inclusive content
Reducing the topic to formulations is a methodological error that most content teams make. Inclusivity begins to work only when all three layers are simultaneously closed.
- Visual series. Different types of figures, age, visible and invisible forms of disability, different family configurations. Target and Old Navy introduced size ranges for mannequins from XS to 4XL right in the retail space — not in a separate 'special' collection, but in the main display.
- Language and tone. Gender-neutral formulations, refusal of euphemisms, orientation on self-designations of groups rather than on 'safe' words invented by the editor.
- Physical accessibility. Alt-texts for images, subtitles for videos, text contrast no lower than WCAG AA, adaptation for screen readers and mobile screens.
A brand that corrected its language but released a video without subtitles and with gray text on a white background closed one-third of the task and continues to lose audience with hearing or vision impairments — and this is not a marginal group, but millions of potential buyers.
How to speak about people with disabilities and the LGBT+ community without falsity
There is no universal correct option — there are two competing approaches, and the choice depends on the specific group.
| Approach | Example formulation | When it works |
|---|---|---|
| Person-first (person-first) | “person with autism”, “person with disability” | Most groups with acquired or mental disabilities |
| Identity-first (identity-first) | “autistic”, “deaf”, “blind” | Deaf and blind communities tend to perceive identity as part of themselves, not as a diagnosis that needs to be softened |
Here there is a reverse trap: overly ‘sterile’ formulations such as ‘people with special needs’ instead of direct ‘disability’ are perceived as patronizing, not diplomatic. The only reliable guide is self-designations used by the group itself in its own public materials, not what seems safe to a staff copywriter.
Why the same text is safe in one country and toxic in another
The Italian coffee brand Chicco d'Oro used the slogan 'Jedem das Seine' in 2024 year — a neutral phrase for the Italian linguistic field. In the German context, it is directly associated with the inscription on the gates of the Buchenwald concentration camp. This is not a translator's error, but a failure of the process: the slogan was approved without verification by a native speaker with an understanding of the historical context of the market.
The gender structure of languages varies radically: in some, grammatical gender exists for professions and nouns, in others it does not, and a literal 'gender-neutral translation' is sometimes physically impossible without rewriting the phrase entirely. Additionally, cultural context affects tone.
| Type of culture | Examples of markets | What this means for brand tone |
|---|---|---|
| High-context | Japan, China, Arab countries, Russia | Direct formulations on sensitive topics sound crude; circumlocutory, veiled tone works |
| Low-context | Germany, Scandinavian countries, USA | Directness is valued, evasiveness is read as insincerity or avoidance of the topic |
Practical conclusion: a single global style guide for inclusive language does not work physically. A basic document with principles is needed — respect for self-designations, rejection of stereotypical scenarios — and regional add-ons that are checked by the language speaker immersed in the local historical context.
Why brands simultaneously lose 50+ and youth
Age discrimination in communication works in both directions at once, and this is rarely recognized within one team. On one hand, advertising almost always shows people 25–40 years old as the only 'normal' audience — meanwhile, the 50+ generation in developed countries controls more than 70% of disposable income and remains almost invisible in the frame, except for drug and insurance ads. On the other hand, youth is lost through outdated perceptions of 'seriousness' of the brand, which do not match how the young audience talks about itself in its own social networks.
The solution is not about adding one elderly character to a video just for the sake of it. A redesign of the product usage scenarios is needed: a non-parental guardian, an older person as an active user of a tech product, not as a victim of the digital divide, a singleton without a 'typical' family in the frame. Real diversity of scenarios, not a showcase from one demographic group — that is what simultaneously reaches both audiences.
How to embed this into the workflow, not keep it in one editor's head
Inclusivity ceases to be a source of risk only when it is embedded in the content approval process, rather than relying on the memory of a specific individual.
- To record in the brand's style guide a list of accepted terms and prohibited formulations, along with justification for each item — a list of 'do nots' without explanation does not work in practice.
- To add mandatory text verification using tools such as Grammarly or LanguageTool at the time of publication — these tools catch unintended formulations that the author's eye misses after the third revision.
- Include a clause about inclusive language in contracts with influencers and agencies: most reputation failures occur in partner content that was never checked before publication.
- Test localized versions of text with a native speaker immersed in the historical context of the market — not just a translator who translates words, not meanings.
- Test the visual content scenario before filming: who is in the frame, what roles, what family configuration — fixes at the script stage cost orders of magnitude less than at the post-production stage.
A common mistake of content teams is treating inclusive language as a one-time project: updated the guidelines, problem solved. In practice, self-designated group names change every few years, and a formulation acceptable three years ago now sounds outdated or patronizing. Annual guideline revision costs less than one public scandal of the level of Chicco d'Oro or Gillette.
Recent articles
MegaFon, BMW, VTB and more 240+ companies. See how it looks in the showcase reel:
Our branding agency is approached to order:
Branding agency services
