Nike’s Kaepernick ad is ‘brand purpose’ at its worst – a fantasy to dupe young people
Nike is doing a disservice to young people by selling them sneakers via the fantasy that they should 'sacrifice everything' and be the next LeBron James or Serena Williams – when they just can’t because these athletes are ‘one in a billion’ – argues Bob Hoffman
This week, the whole Kaepernick/NFL/national anthem thing went off the rails with the release of a new campaign from Nike celebrating Colin Kaepernick’s commitment to “sacrificing everything” for the sake of one’s “dreams”.
The whole controversy is a political battle royal that pits an aggrieved [United States] president against aggrieved athletes: pits ‘patriotism’ against ‘free speech’; pits owners against employees; and pits Democrats against Republicans.
It is of no interest to me. I don’t care if football players stand on their head during the national anthem. What is of interest to me is the awfulness of the Nike spot.
It is stale, cliché-ridden nonsense that we’ve all seen 1,000 times. It is baloney posing as self-actualisation boosterism. It is star spangled bullshit. It could have been written by the most mendacious of the self-help con men who litter the corporate conference circuit.
It’s no longer enough for us to be “the best in the world,” now we have to be “the best ever”. And how do we do it? By “sacrificing everything”. This time Nike has taken its inspirational claptrap and gone way over the edge.
Nike is doing a terrible disservice to people – particularly young, poor, minority people – by selling them sneakers via the con job fantasy that they should “sacrifice everything” and be the next LeBron James or Serena Williams. They can’t. The LeBron Jameses and the Serena Williamses of the world are one in a billion.
Having taught young people for a few years, I have seen the confusion that this kind of slick, glib baloney can engender. “Sacrifice everything” for your dreams? Bullshit. Have your dreams, but do your fucking homework.
The Nike/Kaepernick thing falls into the category of ‘brand purpose’, in which brands try to represent social issues bigger than the products or services they sell. Brand purpose is a very hot issue in business these days.
So let’s put our politics aside for a minute and start the discussion about the wisdom of brand purpose where all marketing allegedly starts – with the consumer.
What does the consumer want who buys our peanut butter, our sweat socks and our vacuum cleaners? It has been my experience that, for the most part, she wants good tasting peanut butter, comfortable sweat socks and a nicely functioning vacuum cleaner.
It is the very rare consumer who is shopping for peanut butter, sweat socks or vacuum cleaners but is secretly hoping to fill a void in philosophy, ideology, or opinions. I find there is very little demand for more philosophy, ideology, or opinions. We seem to have quite enough already. And the market for them is well-supplied by our unrelenting news and social media creators. So why has ‘brand purpose’ become such an attractive idea to brands? I believe it is for reasons of vanity.
First we have the CMOs, marketing experts, and agencies who crusade for brand purpose. The truth is, very few in advertising or marketing are proud of being sales people. They love brand purpose because it takes their endeavors out of the realm of crass commerce and elevates them to the status of social virtue. It happens to be a lot more pleasant and respectable to stand for something noble than to sell stuff.
Then there are the CEO’s and corporate aristocrats. There is a certain type of middle aged man (and they are overwhelmingly male) for whom success and wealth are nice, but not enough. They want to believe that their power and money did not come from coarse business aptitude, but are the material manifestations of their enlightened vision.
They, too, love brand purpose. They can’t resist it because they are terribly susceptible to Guru-itis – the belief that their fame and money make them visionaries. And that they have an opportunity, nay a duty, to educate, inspire and coach us.
In marketing there are no ‘nevers’ or ‘alwayses’. There are certainly some examples of companies who have turned brand purpose into a business advantage. But, like the LeBrons and the Serenas there are very, very few of them.
Because there are no ‘nevers’ or ‘alwayses’, marketing is about likelihoods and probabilities. And the likelihood is that most consumers are shopping for good taste, comfort and functionality — not philosophy, ideology, and opinions.
When you start with ‘what does the consumer want’, you end up with good products and services. When you start with ‘what do the marketers want’, you end up with brand purpose.
If you want to know if the Nike/Kaepernick advertising has been a success or a failure, the people who provide us with marketing ‘research’ and ‘data driven insights’ have fired up their algorithms, analysed their data and reached consensus. And the consensus is that they don’t have a clue.
From the ‘Marketing Intelligence’ website, Morning Consult: “Before the announcement, Nike had a net +69 favorable impression among consumers, it has now declined 34 points to +35 favorable.”
From Edison Trends, via AdAge: “Online sales of Nike products grew 31 per cent from Sunday, Sept. 2, through Tuesday, Sept. 4.”
But online sales represent less than 6 per cent of Nike’s total revenue. So, has the Kaepernick caper helped or hurt Nike sales? Who the hell knows.
Bob Hoffman has been the CEO of two independent agencies and is the author of the Ad Contrarian blog
Apparently they rejected:
Your shitty life and job will never amount to anything
But having some nice trainers will provide a modicum of happiness in a sea of misery.
Not so snappy & prob wouldn’t increase sales much.
ReplyThis Nike spot is but another contributor in the mental health crisis affecting millennials (and older) who are constantly sold the “hustle” as a way to make shafting them seem OK. “You’re stuck in the gig economy with no hope of ever buying a home?” Don’t worry, as long as you have a dream then you’re just doing the “sacrificing” that comes before the win. “Not on the Forbes 30 Under 30 yet?” then maybe you need to sacrifice more! Greatness is wonderful to witness but we need to celebrate the miracle of simply being happy, healthy and productive too because that can be as much of a struggle for some as being the “best ever”.
ReplyVery true. The majority will not be the ‘best ever’ and therefore despite noble efforts they will end up feeling like a failure. Nike’s attempt to grab some attention today is laying down a runway that leads to a cliff.
ReplyGreat, let’s dump brand purpose and go back to hard selling our products. Let Nike talk about how ergonomic their shoes are. Let Dove talk about the ingredients in their soap. Then let’s see how many people are positively tuned towards these brands.
ReplyThat would at least be more honest. That ‘truth’ and ‘authenticity’ that brands are looking for.
On Nike, my manager put some corny self-realisation Nike ad into a recent team off site. That was the exact moment he lost my respect.
ReplyI agree that would be more honest. But also more boring. With less craft. Making more people just tune out of advertising. Turning advertising into a necessary evil rather than a force for culture-building.
ReplyIt’s not binary, brands can and should have a purpose beyond selling products but I did find the copy somewhat cliched and I find the message that sacrificing EVERYTHING to be the best EVER unrealistic and potentially damaging. The emphasis should be on being the best you can personally be not the best compared to everyone who has ever lived. If that’s the only definition of success then 99.999999% of the world’s population are failures, which is an awful message to spread.
ReplyThis is really, really well written, and full of insight.
ReplyHoffman is spot on. This is simply [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] by Nike. It is so [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] it makes me reach for the vomit bag.
ReplyWhat is Colin Kaepernick the best ever at?
ReplyHe has attention and respect of the players aka Nike potential customers. There is a considerable majority of Nike’s target demographic who see his cause and relate. Nike sees this as a Rosa parks like movement and they chose their side of history. Could give them even more of an edge over Adidas.
Reply[Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]
The role of a product is to deliver a functional purpose. The role of a strong brand is to deliver a different type of satisfaction: one that elevates consumers and provides a memorable and sometimes empowering experience. This is particularly true when a mountain of empirical evidence says it’s true. Lastly, that some people are willing to “sacrifice everything” is merely a reference to a universal need: to dream. To discount or diminish this need is to ignore the reality that we are not all born in lucky countries or into caring families or even to healthy bodies. The will to overcome, to be a better self is a message worth telling – particularly when it is absent from the home, the school or increasingly discouraged from public discourse. Brands like Nike may well be exploiting that void. But it is one that needs to be filled. Brand purpose does not aim to do good for its own sake. “Good” is simply a recognition of what needs to be done in a modern, very different market landscape to do well.
ReplyAmen to that.
Oh, and to hell with the cynics that infect the industry at large. The irony is that these people are the very reason why the ad industry is full of bad advertising.
ReplySadly this is the bullshit we have to put up with because brands now want to be a part of uhhhh….culture…. and they only way they seem to know how to do that is by picking some currently trending topic and throw some petrol on the embers.
I would be inclined to agree if the sacrifices this guy made were to be better at his sport…he’s just another [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] athlete who decided to do something ‘viral’ to show his displeasure at a lawfully elected president.
ReplyWhat a tool!
My dear friend, since when in the advertising arena are there principles? [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]
Reply‘What does the consumer want who buys our peanut butter, our sweat socks and our vacuum cleaners? It has been my experience that, for the most part, she wants good tasting peanut butter, comfortable sweat socks and a nicely functioning vacuum cleaner.’
he’s assuming only women shop for things. Also Nike’s sales since this ad are up 31%. So something is working, but [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] doesn’t understand it.
ReplyHave to say, I don’t agree with this opinion piece for the most-part. Taken too literally, yes the Nike spot is about becoming the one-in-a-billion star. But is it meant to be taken literally? Or is it a metaphor about standing for something you believe in? Striving for something and being willing to sacrifice less important things to achieve it? Whether that’s racial equality in Kaepernick’s case, or becoming the greatest ever in Serena’s. Or a more humble ambition for the average person in the street. Strip away brand purpose, and what the hell does Nike stand for versus adidas, New Balance etc? That feels like a very old-school way of thinking – you might as well bring back the washing powder door step challenge!
Having said that, I thought that Nike’s “Find your greatness” portrayed their brand purpose so much better, as it celebrated athletes of all abilities, rather than championing the one-in-a-billion superhumans. Their London Olympic spot was perfect.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6ywRUmS_4w
ReplyHave your say