That’s exactly what happened with Nike and Pepsi: in one case, provocation helped the brand strengthen its connection with the audience; in the other, it sparked a wave of backlash, forced the company to apologize, and pull the campaign almost immediately.

In today’s saturated media landscape, brands increasingly use provocation to stand out. Scandalous advertising challenges social norms, touches on sensitive issues, and sparks widespread discussion. But along with reach, it also brings risks: backlash, boycotts, loss of trust, and long-lasting associations between the brand and the controversy.

In this article, we’ll explore what controversial advertising is, the most common types of brands that use it, real examples of both success and failure, and when provocation in marketing actually works — and when it backfires.

What Is Scandalous Advertising?

Scandalous advertising is a form of marketing communication in which a brand deliberately uses provocation to stand out from the crowd. To do this, it draws on topics that are likely to spark debate — such as sexuality, religion, politics, social inequality, cultural taboos, or acute social tensions. The goal of this type of advertising is not just to showcase a product, but to trigger emotion, reaction, and conversation.

That is why controversial advertising often generates significant buzz, but does not guarantee a positive outcome for the brand. It can strengthen a company’s positioning and make a campaign go viral, but it can also lead to criticism, boycotts, and a loss of trust. It is a tool for capturing attention — not always for driving sales.

Examples and Types of Scandalous Advertising

SEXUAL PROVOCATION

The most common type of controversial advertising relies on sexuality and erotic imagery. A classic example is Calvin Klein’s campaigns from the 1990s, which sparked widespread protests due to their highly provocative photos of young models.

Despite the controversy — or partly because of it — these campaigns significantly boosted Calvin Klein’s brand awareness and contributed to its commercial success. They also set a lasting trend for provocative advertising in the fashion industry that continues to this day. This case became a clear example of how pushing the boundaries of social norms can be both risky and highly effective as a marketing strategy.

One of the most sensitive and high-risk categories of controversial advertising involves campaigns that touch on religious themes and deeply rooted cultural values. A notable example is Benetton’s controversial “UNHATE” campaign from 2011. Its central element was a series of photomontages depicting world religious leaders kissing.

The image that caused the greatest outrage showed Pope Benedict XVI kissing the imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar University. The ad triggered an immediate and sharp response from the Vatican, which called it an “unacceptable use of the Pope’s image” and demanded that the campaign be withdrawn at once.

Such provocations are not limited to Christianity. Advertising campaigns that involve symbols of Islam, Judaism, or other religions also regularly trigger массові protests and boycotts. For example, the use of religious calligraphy or sacred texts for commercial purposes often leads to serious conflicts with Muslim communities.

The use of sensitive social and political issues in advertising has become a noticeable trend over the past decade. This approach — often referred to as “brand activism” or “purpose-driven marketing” — reflects a growing desire among brands to position themselves not just as commercial entities, but as active participants in broader social conversations.

One of the most prominent and widely discussed examples of this approach was Nike’s 2018 campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick, an NFL player who became a symbol of protest against racial injustice in the United States.

Kaepernick became widely known for being one of the first to kneel during the national anthem before games as a protest against police brutality toward African Americans.

The campaign’s slogan, “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything,” directly referenced his personal story, as this protest effectively cost him his professional football career.

The public reaction to the campaign was sharply polarized. Supporters of civil rights movements and more liberal audiences praised Nike’s bold stance, and the company saw a notable increase in sales across certain regions and demographic groups.

At the same time, more conservative audiences — including many politicians and public figures — accused the brand of disrespecting national symbols and the military. Videos of people burning Nike sneakers spread across social media, and some schools and sports organizations cut ties with the brand.

Failed Examples of Scandalous Advertising

Pepsi’s 2017 campaign featuring Kendall Jenner became one of the most cited examples of failed controversial advertising in modern marketing. In the nearly two-minute commercial, Kendall Jenner leaves a photoshoot to join a street protest and appears to defuse a tense standoff between protesters and police simply by handing a police officer a can of Pepsi.

The public response was immediate and devastating. Both audiences and the media sharply criticized the company for attempting to commercialize and oversimplify serious social movements, particularly Black Lives Matter, which was especially prominent at the time. The ad was accused of trivializing major social issues and protests against police brutality by portraying them as something that could be resolved with a soft drink.

Pepsi was forced to respond to the backlash almost immediately after the ad was released. At first, the company tried to defend the creative concept, saying the campaign was intended to promote a message of unity and peace. However, as the criticism continued to grow, Pepsi pulled the ad within 24 hours of its debut and issued an official apology. In its statement, the company admitted that it had “missed the mark.”

Dove

Another example of a campaign that sparked widespread backlash and negative reactions is Dove. In 2017, the company released a Facebook ad in which a Black woman appeared to “transform” into a white woman.

The visual message was widely interpreted as implying that “white” is better or “cleaner,” which triggered outrage on social media and led to calls for a boycott. The public perceived the ad as racist and offensive. Although Dove quickly apologized and removed the video, the brand’s reputation suffered significant damage. This case became a classic example of how a misstep in communication can cost a company the trust of its audience.

Why Some Scandalous Campaigns Work While Others Fail

Scandalous advertising is not inherently good or bad — its impact depends on how well it aligns with the brand and the context. The same provocative approach can either strengthen a company’s positioning or trigger backlash and reputational damage.

The contrast between Nike and Pepsi is especially telling.

In Nike’s case, the brand took a clear stance that was consistent with its values and previous messaging. The company had long been associated with themes of strength, struggle, and social justice, so its support of Colin Kaepernick felt like a natural extension of that identity. Despite the criticism, the campaign resonated with Nike’s core audience and strengthened the brand’s emotional connection with consumers.

Pepsi, by contrast, had the opposite effect. The Kendall Jenner campaign came across as a superficial attempt to capitalize on social tension for commercial gain. It had no meaningful connection to the brand’s values and reduced a complex issue to a simplistic gesture. As a result, it triggered public outrage and quickly turned into a reputational failure.

These examples show that provocation only works when it carries real meaning and is backed by a clear brand position.

To make sure scandalous advertising strengthens a brand rather than damages it, several key factors should be taken into account:

• Authenticity. A campaign should reflect the brand’s values and previous actions, rather than feel like an attempt to jump on a trend.
• Audience awareness. It is essential to understand how different audience segments will interpret the message and whether they are likely to support it.
• Preparedness for criticism. Controversy almost always provokes a polarized response, so the brand needs a clear stance and a response plan in case of backlash.

Ultimately, the difference between successful and failed controversial advertising lies not in how provocative it is, but in how relevant and honest it feels.

How Scandalous Advertising Affects a Brand

Scandalous advertising almost always creates a strong impact, but that impact is rarely straightforward. It can either strengthen a brand’s position or create long-term reputational risks. Much depends on how the audience interprets the message and whether it aligns with their expectations of the brand.

Short-Term Effects

In the first days after launch, a provocative campaign usually attracts maximum attention. The brand sees a sharp spike in media mentions and social media conversations, while the ad itself spreads organically. Controversial campaigns often become newsworthy topics, significantly increasing reach without additional distribution costs.

At the same time, brand awareness and audience engagement grow. People do not just see the ad — they discuss it, share it, and form their own opinions about it. However, this stage can also bring the first signs of negative reaction, including criticism, backlash, or calls for a boycott.

Long-Term Effects

In the long run, scandalous advertising has a deeper impact — shaping how the brand is perceived and affecting its overall reputation. It almost always leads to polarization: one part of the audience may distance itself from the brand out of disagreement or disappointment, while another may feel even more aligned with the brand and its stance.

In some cases, this can result in the loss of more conservative consumers or business partners. In others, it can help a brand define its identity more clearly and strengthen its connection with a loyal audience. That is why controversial advertising often does not change the total number of customers so much as it reshapes who those customers are.

Controversy always polarizes — but it does not always sell.

When Is It Worth Using Scandalous Advertising?

Scandalous advertising can be an effective tool — but only under certain conditions. Using provocation simply for attention is one of the most common mistakes and often leads to reputational crises. To assess whether this approach makes sense, brands should first answer a few key questions.

Checklist Before Launching a Scandalous Campaign

• Does it align with your brand?

If your brand has traditionally communicated in a restrained and neutral way, a sudden, provocative move may feel unnatural and undermine trust. Controversial advertising tends to work better for brands with a bold or provocative positioning.

• Is your audience ready for it?

It is important to understand how your target audience will interpret the message. What resonates positively with one group may trigger backlash from another. Without a deep understanding of your audience, the risks increase significantly.

• Do you have a crisis communication plan?

Controversy almost always comes with criticism. A brand should prepare response scenarios in advance, including official statements, a clear company position, and actions to take if negative reactions escalate.

• Is there a real purpose behind the provocation?

This is the most important question. If there is no clear idea or brand stance behind the campaign, it will likely come across as an attempt to chase hype. In that case, the risks usually outweigh the potential benefits.

Ultimately, controversial advertising works when it is a natural extension of the brand — not a random experiment. Provocation should amplify the message, not replace it.

In today’s world, where consumers are increasingly socially aware, provocation for the sake of provocation can cause lasting damage to a brand’s reputation. Successful controversial advertising must carry a deeper meaning and align with the company’s core values.

Frequently Asked Questions About Scandalous Advertising

What is scandalous advertising?

Scandalous advertising is a type of marketing communication that uses provocation, sensitive topics, or the violation of social norms to attract attention to a brand. It triggers strong emotions and often becomes a subject of discussion in the media and on social platforms.

Does scandalous advertising work?

Yes, scandalous advertising can be effective in increasing brand awareness and generating virality. However, it does not always have a positive impact on sales or brand reputation. The outcome depends on whether the campaign aligns with the brand’s values and meets audience expectations.

What are some examples of scandalous advertising?

Some of the best-known examples include Benetton’s “UNHATE” campaign, Nike’s ad featuring Colin Kaepernick, and failed campaigns like Pepsi’s with Kendall Jenner and Dove. These cases show how provocation can either strengthen a brand or damage its reputation.

Why does scandalous advertising trigger negative reactions?

Negative responses usually occur when an ad touches on sensitive issues or feels inauthentic. If a brand uses social or cultural topics without a deep understanding of the context, it may be perceived as manipulative or as an attempt to chase attention.

Should brands use scandalous advertising?

Scandalous advertising can be effective if it aligns with the brand’s positioning and carries a clear message. However, before launching such campaigns, it is important to assess the risks, anticipate audience reactions, and have a crisis communication plan in place.