When Social Reform Meets the Marketplace: The Case of #MeToo

The #MeToo movement has influenced not only public attitudes towards sexual misconduct but also consumer spending. New research from the University of Arizona suggests that audiences have become less willing to support films containing problematic sexual content, with these changing preferences directly affecting box office performance. The findings indicate that even relatively small shifts in consumer attitudes can translate into millions of dollars in revenue, raising important questions about whether the film industry should adapt its creative and production practices to reflect evolving social expectations.

The study was led by Nooshin L. Warren, Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Arizona’s Eller College of Management, in collaboration with researchers from Texas Christian University and the University of Oregon. Published in the Journal of Marketing, the research examined 1,523 top-grossing films released between 2010 and 2023. Using a combination of artificial intelligence and manual verification, the researchers analysed portrayals of sexual misconduct, female objectification, gender stereotyping, and gender-related characteristics such as agency and strength. They also incorporated over 300,000 Internet Movie Database keywords, audience demographics, theatrical release data, and real-world scandals to provide a comprehensive assessment of each film.

The results demonstrate that consumer preferences changed significantly following the rise of #MeToo. Films containing depictions of sexual misconduct generally experienced lower box office revenues, with relatively minor differences in content associated with revenue changes of between US$8 million and US$13 million. Warren argues that from an economic perspective, social movements can alter consumer demand, which subsequently influences market supply. Rather than remaining solely a cultural phenomenon, #MeToo appears to have become an economic force capable of reshaping purchasing decisions and industry incentives.

Despite this increased rejection of problematic sexual behaviour, the study found that audiences were less receptive to films presenting non-traditional gender roles. While survey participants expressed support for reducing toxic masculinity and promoting gender equality, they showed less interest in films featuring emotionally vulnerable men or women as primary breadwinners. These findings suggest that although consumers increasingly reject harmful behaviour, their acceptance of alternative gender representations has progressed more slowly, revealing a gap between stated beliefs and actual consumption choices.

The film industry provided an ideal setting for examining these effects because it was both central to the emergence of the #MeToo movement and characterised by lengthy production cycles. Since films typically require years to complete, producers could not rapidly revise scripts or recast projects after #MeToo gained widespread attention. This production lag created a natural environment for observing changes in audience demand while keeping the supply of films relatively stable, allowing researchers to isolate the movement’s impact on consumer behaviour.

Warren argues that the findings extend beyond Hollywood. Many industries, including advertising, publishing, gaming, and consumer brands, continue to rely on traditional gender stereotypes in their products and marketing. As public expectations continue to evolve, businesses may need to reconsider how they portray gender if they wish to remain competitive. Although considerable progress has been made since the gendered advertising of previous decades, the study suggests that both industries and consumers are still adapting to changing social norms, highlighting the continuing influence of social movements on marketplace behaviour.

More information: Chi P. Tran et al, How the #MeToo Movement Has Reshaped Gender Dynamics in the Marketplace: Evidence from the Entertainment Industry, Journal of Marketing. DOI: 10.1177/00222429261464934

Journal information: Journal of Marketing Provided by University of Arizona