August 25, 2008
Hallmark Unveils Gay Wedding Cards
By Tom Ryan
Two months after California sanctioned same-sex marriages, Hallmark announced plans to introduce same-sex wedding cards. Making no direct mention of same-sex unions, the cards feature two tuxedos, overlapping hearts or intertwined flowers, with neutral best wishes inside. One says: “Two hearts. One promise.”
California is the second state to legalize gay marriage after Massachusetts. A handful of others recognize civil unions, although not official marriage.
“These new wedding cards were created in direct response to consumers’ desires to have cards that include specifically tailored language and images for same-sex marriages or civil unions,” Hallmark said a statement released to gaywired.com. “It is our goal to be inclusive rather than exclusive so that our products appeal to the widest range of people who wish to communicate and connect with one another.”
The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law estimates more than 85,000 same-sex couples in the U.S. have entered into legal unions since Hawaii started offering some legal benefits to gay and lesbian couples in 1997. It estimates nearly 120,000 more will marry in California during the next three years.
Hallmark has increasingly added more unorthodox cards to its range, including
ones for those having difficulties getting pregnant or going through rehab.
Last year, “coming out” cards were introduced. The four designs of same-sex
marriage cards are being gradually released this summer and will be widely
available next year.
Kathryn Hamm, president of gayweddings.com, feels the cards
fill a need. “When I have shopped for situations like babies or weddings for
gay friends, I have good luck in quirky stores,” she told the Associated
Press. “But if you are just in a generic store…the bride and groom symbol
or words are in most cards. It becomes difficult to find some that are neutral
but have some style.”
Not unsurprisingly, some backlash has already occurred. The right-wing American Family Association (AFA) has launched a protest of Hallmark while Concerned Women for America (CWA), a Christian advocacy organization, also condemned the cards.
“By latching onto the latest fad generated by the homosexual special interest groups, Hallmark is negating its image as a wholesome company that promotes American values and pro-family principles in its products,” said Janice Crouse, Director of CWA’s research unit, the Beverly LaHaye Institute. “American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products.”
Some Hallmark stores are also pushing back against the cards. An Associated Press report on The Olympian website said that a family that owns seven Hallmark card stores in Idaho has said it will not carry the new line. Hallmark has said it will leave it up to individual stores to decide whether or not to carry the cards.
Hallmark’s largest competitor, American Greetings Corp., has no plans to enter the market, saying its current offerings are general enough to speak to a lot of different relationships.
Discussion Question: What do you think of the market opportunity for same-sex wedding cards? How big a backlash, if any, do you expect Hallmark will receive for introducing the cards?
- Hallmark Introduces Gay Marriage Cards – The Associated Press/CBS News
- Hallmark Aims for Gay Market with Same-Sex Wedding Cards – gaywired.com
- Hallmark Introduces New Line of Cards for Gay Marriage – Christian Newswire
- Some Idaho stores won’t carry same-sex greeting cards – The Associated Press/The Olympian
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
I think they should be worried about backlash from the gay community; a community that increasingly won’t to settle for ambiguous references and safe, “fill in your thoughts” imagery. Plenty of other companies hit the market straight on (pun intended) without playing it safe. Am I the only one who thinks that Hallmark copped out?
Writing off Hallmark because they now offer cards to serve all, is like boycotting Nike when the convenience store thief wears a Nike shirt.
Good for Hallmark. This is not a company that makes decisions lightly and they are quite smart to take the lead in terms of this market opportunity.
There are some great examples of other companies, including Kimpton Hotels, smartly making their brands relevant to these customers.
While there might be risks from those endeavoring to claim moral high ground, the rewards way outweigh them.
I don’t expect to see any meaningful backlash. I think it will be a low demand card such as Grandparents Day, Secretary’s Day, or the 50th Wedding Anniversary. It will probably just be a small section in the card department, except in California where it will be somewhat larger. Eventually I think all of us are going to need to buy one of those cards so it’s nice that Hallmark has them.
“American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products.”
What a wonderful line. It is appropriately socially responsible and morally neutral. I’m not sure that I have any personal brand loyalty to Hallmark when it comes to buying my greeting cards. I usually look for something my kids won’t call “preachy” or that my wife won’t call “ostentatious”–then I recoil in disgust at the price and go on to searching for an envelope that fits.
But Hallmark is an iconic American brand. Everyone knows you can find the modern-day moral equivalent of “Bonanza” on the Hallmark channel–and we like that.
But think about it. You never saw Ben Cartwright discriminating against the Chinese miners or demanding they burn the witch. He was always fair, neutral until provoked and proactive to a fault when it came to helping others. Maybe Hallmark is just carrying on what Hank Williams Jr. dubbed “a family tradition.”
Let franchisees, retailers and consumers vote with their wallets, Hallmark is just making the benefits of their products available to all in a morally neutral way. Sounds to me like something that “American businesses having a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products.” would do.
It’s another market supported by the law. The backlash will be small and forgotten quickly.
Hooray for Hallmark! Marriage is not a fad, regardless whether it is between heterosexuals or homosexuals. It’s important that we are allowed to celebrate the unions of all people in love and I applaud Hallmark for giving us the tools to do just that!
Good for Hallmark! They are big enough and entrenched enough that retailers can’t afford to boycott the whole offering, without impacting their own businesses. This puts Hallmark in a position of leadership. The good news–Hallmark seized the opportunity.
If ever there was a business composed of an assembly of niche products, it’s the greeting card business. In a rational world, the addition of cards celebrating same-gender unions should be as completely unremarkable as cards for baptisms, bar mitzvahs, 100th birthdays, or any other life event celebrated by a subset of the total population.
In that context, any backlash from social conservatives would strike me as mean-spirited. There may be some of this, but the majority of decent, loving Americans will recognize that Hallmark’s merchandising choices do not determine the spectrum of social norms–they merely reflect them.
Any one who writes off Hallmark because they are keeping up with the needs of diverse consumer segments should get a card that says:
Roses Are Red
Violets Are Blue
Ostriches are in the sand with their head
And so are you.
…Or something like that.
I live in West Hollywood. Gay marriage is an every day event now. The cards that they should be getting ready are the gay divorce cards because not everyone, gay or straight, lives happily ever after.
In reading the comments carefully, I find it hard to believe that I may be the only one that thinks this is a bad idea–a really bad idea. I also find it hard to believe that Hallmark could really have done their homework on this one. If so, I have a real misconception of their average customer.
I am curious as to why it’s unloving or having my head in the sand to have my own values. They are neither unloving or unrealistic. Having a different moral view neither makes you unloving or unaware that a secular society’s perception may differ.
All the best to Hallmark. They are in a non-necessity business and are trying anything they can. This effort will impact them some but not significantly. They are in a business that is simply changing. I can’t blame them for trying, even if I disagree or wouldn’t have recommended it.
It’s about time! I believe that, contrary to the CWA’s view that gay marriage is a fad, this is a growing market and should be serviced as such–regardless of one’s personal views. I also expect more card companies to jump on board once sales figures for this market become known.
“If Hallmark does it, it’s got to be good!” No, that belongs to another brand.
In a more serious vein, to think that Hallmark would take this controversial step without thoroughly considering the magnitude of the repercussions is foolish. Hallmark knows exactly what they are doing.
They are not forcing their franchisees to sell them. Otherwise, they are doing exactly what Janice Crouse says they should, “American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their product.”
I am positive that Hallmark has done extensive research and homework on this latest card segment launch, and likely anticipated a slight backlash. I have to believe the size of this segment and anticipated growth potential warrants Hallmark shelf space to house this new card section. The majority of card shoppers will simply dismiss shopping or viewing these cards as they will have little/no impact on their purchase decisions.
As long as their retailers support this latest segment launch and do not receive shopper backlash, (which I doubt will occur) then Hallmark is serving an emerging shopper interest and need; just as they have done in the past.
I have written extensively about the importance of retailers catering to their local marketplace. Hallmark has made a smart business decision to offer specific cards to the gay community. The demographics and income statistics say that this is a valuable sector of the marketplace.
Will there be a backlash? Of course! Hallmark is a ‘wholesome’ brand and I can see ultra conservatives jumping on the anti gay bandwagon with this. Profit should not be deterred because of political views so I tip my hat to Hallmark for seeing an unserviced market and filling the void.
Great initiative for Hallmark. This is 2008. There shouldn’t be any reason any company should be weary about catering to the gay segment, BUT you’ll always have people venting. Unfortunately, in democratic societies, even prejudiced loudmouths get to say their piece.
I hope if there’s any backlash, that Hallmark doesn’t cave in and their business prospers.
Hallmark has 1,000s of cards. Countless. Catering to every situation, gender, age, religion etc…. Why should anyone complain about a handful of cards for gay people? Unless the media makes a big stink about it, the majority of everyday shoppers there wouldn’t even notice anyway.
All the best to Hallmark.
It’s a proven fact that the Gay/Lesbian market segment is an untapped source. Gay men generally have no children, have a college educations, and above average DOUBLE incomes. They are also brand loyal to companies that are GLBT friendly. Hallmark is doing the right thing, by joining this community.
James Tenser made an interesting point. Cards for Jewish holidays are common. Yet there are many more gays and lesbians than Jews in the USA. So if it’s profitable for Hallmark to sell Jewish holiday cards, it ought to be profitable to sell cards for a much larger minority group.
And the alleged “backlash” isn’t likely to matter, except to those who take press releases seriously. There are gay and lesbian days at Disneyland and Disney World. Many famous brands market to gays and lesbians (Budweiser, American Airlines, Subaru, etc.)
As for Hallmark’s gay and lesbian cards being less than fully out of the closet: their heterosexual cards aren’t very bold either. The sexiest cards aren’t Hallmark cards, regardless of orientation.
Hallmark needs every customer they can find. Greeting cards are a declining industry because more and more Americans use e-mail.
More Discussions
As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…Is Supply Chain Volatility Here To Stay?
Can we expect an ongoing volatility to remain in terms of retail supply chain?Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?
I think they should be worried about backlash from the gay community; a community that increasingly won’t to settle for ambiguous references and safe, “fill in your thoughts” imagery. Plenty of other companies hit the market straight on (pun intended) without playing it safe. Am I the only one who thinks that Hallmark copped out?
Writing off Hallmark because they now offer cards to serve all, is like boycotting Nike when the convenience store thief wears a Nike shirt.
Good for Hallmark. This is not a company that makes decisions lightly and they are quite smart to take the lead in terms of this market opportunity.
There are some great examples of other companies, including Kimpton Hotels, smartly making their brands relevant to these customers.
While there might be risks from those endeavoring to claim moral high ground, the rewards way outweigh them.
I don’t expect to see any meaningful backlash. I think it will be a low demand card such as Grandparents Day, Secretary’s Day, or the 50th Wedding Anniversary. It will probably just be a small section in the card department, except in California where it will be somewhat larger. Eventually I think all of us are going to need to buy one of those cards so it’s nice that Hallmark has them.
“American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products.”
What a wonderful line. It is appropriately socially responsible and morally neutral. I’m not sure that I have any personal brand loyalty to Hallmark when it comes to buying my greeting cards. I usually look for something my kids won’t call “preachy” or that my wife won’t call “ostentatious”–then I recoil in disgust at the price and go on to searching for an envelope that fits.
But Hallmark is an iconic American brand. Everyone knows you can find the modern-day moral equivalent of “Bonanza” on the Hallmark channel–and we like that.
But think about it. You never saw Ben Cartwright discriminating against the Chinese miners or demanding they burn the witch. He was always fair, neutral until provoked and proactive to a fault when it came to helping others. Maybe Hallmark is just carrying on what Hank Williams Jr. dubbed “a family tradition.”
Let franchisees, retailers and consumers vote with their wallets, Hallmark is just making the benefits of their products available to all in a morally neutral way. Sounds to me like something that “American businesses having a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products.” would do.
It’s another market supported by the law. The backlash will be small and forgotten quickly.
Hooray for Hallmark! Marriage is not a fad, regardless whether it is between heterosexuals or homosexuals. It’s important that we are allowed to celebrate the unions of all people in love and I applaud Hallmark for giving us the tools to do just that!
Good for Hallmark! They are big enough and entrenched enough that retailers can’t afford to boycott the whole offering, without impacting their own businesses. This puts Hallmark in a position of leadership. The good news–Hallmark seized the opportunity.
If ever there was a business composed of an assembly of niche products, it’s the greeting card business. In a rational world, the addition of cards celebrating same-gender unions should be as completely unremarkable as cards for baptisms, bar mitzvahs, 100th birthdays, or any other life event celebrated by a subset of the total population.
In that context, any backlash from social conservatives would strike me as mean-spirited. There may be some of this, but the majority of decent, loving Americans will recognize that Hallmark’s merchandising choices do not determine the spectrum of social norms–they merely reflect them.
Any one who writes off Hallmark because they are keeping up with the needs of diverse consumer segments should get a card that says:
Roses Are Red
Violets Are Blue
Ostriches are in the sand with their head
And so are you.
…Or something like that.
I live in West Hollywood. Gay marriage is an every day event now. The cards that they should be getting ready are the gay divorce cards because not everyone, gay or straight, lives happily ever after.
In reading the comments carefully, I find it hard to believe that I may be the only one that thinks this is a bad idea–a really bad idea. I also find it hard to believe that Hallmark could really have done their homework on this one. If so, I have a real misconception of their average customer.
I am curious as to why it’s unloving or having my head in the sand to have my own values. They are neither unloving or unrealistic. Having a different moral view neither makes you unloving or unaware that a secular society’s perception may differ.
All the best to Hallmark. They are in a non-necessity business and are trying anything they can. This effort will impact them some but not significantly. They are in a business that is simply changing. I can’t blame them for trying, even if I disagree or wouldn’t have recommended it.
It’s about time! I believe that, contrary to the CWA’s view that gay marriage is a fad, this is a growing market and should be serviced as such–regardless of one’s personal views. I also expect more card companies to jump on board once sales figures for this market become known.
“If Hallmark does it, it’s got to be good!” No, that belongs to another brand.
In a more serious vein, to think that Hallmark would take this controversial step without thoroughly considering the magnitude of the repercussions is foolish. Hallmark knows exactly what they are doing.
They are not forcing their franchisees to sell them. Otherwise, they are doing exactly what Janice Crouse says they should, “American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their product.”
I am positive that Hallmark has done extensive research and homework on this latest card segment launch, and likely anticipated a slight backlash. I have to believe the size of this segment and anticipated growth potential warrants Hallmark shelf space to house this new card section. The majority of card shoppers will simply dismiss shopping or viewing these cards as they will have little/no impact on their purchase decisions.
As long as their retailers support this latest segment launch and do not receive shopper backlash, (which I doubt will occur) then Hallmark is serving an emerging shopper interest and need; just as they have done in the past.
I have written extensively about the importance of retailers catering to their local marketplace. Hallmark has made a smart business decision to offer specific cards to the gay community. The demographics and income statistics say that this is a valuable sector of the marketplace.
Will there be a backlash? Of course! Hallmark is a ‘wholesome’ brand and I can see ultra conservatives jumping on the anti gay bandwagon with this. Profit should not be deterred because of political views so I tip my hat to Hallmark for seeing an unserviced market and filling the void.
Great initiative for Hallmark. This is 2008. There shouldn’t be any reason any company should be weary about catering to the gay segment, BUT you’ll always have people venting. Unfortunately, in democratic societies, even prejudiced loudmouths get to say their piece.
I hope if there’s any backlash, that Hallmark doesn’t cave in and their business prospers.
Hallmark has 1,000s of cards. Countless. Catering to every situation, gender, age, religion etc…. Why should anyone complain about a handful of cards for gay people? Unless the media makes a big stink about it, the majority of everyday shoppers there wouldn’t even notice anyway.
All the best to Hallmark.
It’s a proven fact that the Gay/Lesbian market segment is an untapped source. Gay men generally have no children, have a college educations, and above average DOUBLE incomes. They are also brand loyal to companies that are GLBT friendly. Hallmark is doing the right thing, by joining this community.
James Tenser made an interesting point. Cards for Jewish holidays are common. Yet there are many more gays and lesbians than Jews in the USA. So if it’s profitable for Hallmark to sell Jewish holiday cards, it ought to be profitable to sell cards for a much larger minority group.
And the alleged “backlash” isn’t likely to matter, except to those who take press releases seriously. There are gay and lesbian days at Disneyland and Disney World. Many famous brands market to gays and lesbians (Budweiser, American Airlines, Subaru, etc.)
As for Hallmark’s gay and lesbian cards being less than fully out of the closet: their heterosexual cards aren’t very bold either. The sexiest cards aren’t Hallmark cards, regardless of orientation.
Hallmark needs every customer they can find. Greeting cards are a declining industry because more and more Americans use e-mail.