Despite WW’s positive messaging, criticism has surfaced regarding the sincerity and effectiveness of the rebrand. Trending buzzwords in the health and fitness world today include “body positivity” and “self-care”. While WW is trying to align their brand with an overall healthy theme, critics are unimpressed, claiming that this notion of wellness feels inauthentic for a brand that was built on “body shaming”.

The notion of “the thinner the winner” has carried over into WW advertising and culture. For example in 2016, Weight Watchers released an ad campaign in Australia that suggested overweight women have dismal sex lives. This received major backlash for body-shaming and the company pulled the ad soon after. In 2017, the company was placed back in the spotlight when “fat-shaming” messages were sent between employees via WhatsApp were leaked.

WW is not alone when it comes to this type of criticism. Multiple magazines and companies like Victoria’s Secret receive constant backlash for their severely retouched images and misrepresentation of beauty standards. Creating a more realistic brand can have numerous positive effects, as many customers value company transparency. In a proactive step, American Eagle’s lingerie brand, Aerie, ran their “Real” campaign, which featured unretouched models. This campaign was so successful that American Eagle adopted it as the new standard for Aerie.

In order to fight eating disorders and inaccessible ideals of beauty, the French government recently put a law into effect that bans overly skinny models. Models now require doctor’s certificates to indicate a healthy body max index and any photos that are digitally retouched will now require a disclaimer. Employers that break the law could face up to six months in jail and receive fines up to $82,000.

While people’s bodies are often subject to photo alterations, companies can gain a competitive advantage by increasing brand transparency and relatability, as seen in the example with Aerie. Social media has made it incredibly easy for people to compare themselves to their ideal looks and lifestyles. However, this ease of comparison makes it difficult to separate reality from air-brushed fantasy.

In early 2018, WW announced that they would be offering free membership to girls between the ages of 13 and 17 in order to promote healthy lifestyles at a young age. Despite WW’s claim, critics were appalled that the company would use a recruitment tactic to prey on young, vulnerable girls in order to get lifetime customers. WW responded saying, “what we will be providing for teens is a program that guides healthy habits for life, not a diet.” Diet or not, this was a strategic move for WW to build brand loyalty with customers at a young age.

Where is the line between being comfortable in your own body and recognizing that your health is at stake? People can be so quick to call out brands like WW for their actions that they lose sight of the bigger picture. While some may feel the need to focus on the negative aspects of the rebranding and claim that it’s efforts won’t work, I commend a brand that is willing to take such a significant step with the risk of losing some of their brand equity, in order to focus on a more holistic approach to “wellness that works”.

Where is the line between being comfortable in your own body and recognizing that your health is at stake? People can be so quick to call out brands like WW for their actions that they lose sight of the bigger picture. While some may feel the need to focus on the negative aspects of the rebranding and claim that it’s efforts won’t work, I commend a brand that is willing to take such a significant step with the risk of losing some of their brand equity, in order to focus on a more holistic approach to “wellness that works”.