Why Brands Cause A Stir

“Outstanding shithousery”, “flawless writing”, “ nasty work” – the users of X have spoken (and it's an unlikely guess what they are talking about).

When defender Sol Campbell controversially moved across north London from the white of Spurs to the red of biggest rival Arsenal in 2001, no one would have dreamed that it would be a topic any advertiser would capitalise on more than two decades later. 

Enter Google Pixel.

Ahead of January’s north London derby featuring the two teams, the tech giant purposely poured salt in the wounds of Spurs fans with a TV spot featuring the Campbell that poked fun at his previous football team’s expense. While audiences quickly pointed out their love for the work, the razor’s edge between humour and annoyance once again proved a fine line. But on YouTube alone, the film has been viewed more than 330,000 times in three weeks.

Jaguar is another brand that recently caused a stir. Its 'Copy Nothing' film showcased its rebrand, new EV concept car and repositioning from sleek, James Bond-esque vehicles to futuristic robotic fusion of pink, generating a cesspit of polarised opinions. Many failed to hide their disdain for the "dreadful" work while others praised the unexpectedly bold change in approach.

Professor Scott Galloway, a professor of marketing at the New York University Stern School of Business, describes the brand as one that’s “been in a coma for years, is trying to wake up… and it’s gasping.” He highlights that its sales were at a near all-time low accompanied by near non-existent searches online compared to the likes of Elon Musk’s Tesla. Despite ruffling a few feathers, the ad got people talking – that in itself may have been its very intention.

"Getting attention is key to any marketing campaign, so mission accomplished. Sort of," continues Galloway.

But why do some ads cause outrage while others get the blood pumping in a way that makes turning to a keyboard to splurge an opinion a priority? Do audiences really take ads so seriously?

The answer comes down to science.

Pleasing The Human Brain

It’s a myth that humans only use 10 per cent of their brains. It’s an organ made up of billions of nerves near equalling the number of stars in the Milky Way – and in the time taken to read this sentence, a higher percentage of it is being used than most would assume.  

The study of the brain and how it functions is underpinned by neuroscience, and despite every human having a brain, reactions to stimuli, such as beauty, differ. “While certainly subjective, it’s sculpted by factors that contribute to the survival of the group,” says Anjan Chatterjee, professor of neurology at the University of Pennsylvania in his TED talk. 

For advertisers, hitting this nail on the head is down to neuroaesthetics - the exploration of the “biological underpinnings” of visual experiences, including the “cognitive processes of creativity”. In other words, how the brain and behaviour responds to the world around us. 

Science has long since provided cornerstones for the basics of what humans like visually; colours need to be bright and bold as they immediately attract eyes – a notion deriving from early history humans searching for ripe, edible fruit.

Shapes are incredibly important too, with unfamiliar patterns grabbing attention immediately. This is often explained by the seemingly universal awe experienced when a unique piece of architecture is viewed, for example.

For such information to really take hold, the key lies within the brain itself - more specifically the cerebral cortex. 

Home to information processing, the cerebral cortex is located at the front of the brain and is responsible for high-functioning processes, from problem-solving to memory retention. Think of it as the striking of a match to create a fire.

When brands deliberately try to light that fire, they’re fighting against noise the industry already creates, elbowing for the top spot. And according to science, such actions are likely to ingrain themselves into a very important thing that helps decide whether something is liked or not: memory. 

There’s three stages to processing a memory, according to Raphy March, managing director at Cowry Consulting, VCCP’s behavioural science consultancy firm: sensory memory, short-term memory and long-term memory. 

Sensory memory relies on actually attracting attention in the first place; the short-term is grounded by making information feel important to audiences while long-term memory means if something is heard enough, repeated enough, seen enough, the brain encodes a message of recognition that can last a lifetime.

“Getting into the sensory memory is why so many brands go big on being a bit blunt or in your face because it helps to pause the habitual state that we're in and grab attention,” March explains. “The short-term is also important because this is where we see the balance between something that might have got our attention but becomes annoying.” 

A key component to kicking the brain into gear is visual stimulation - something March argues is the most important way of capturing attention. 

Researchers have long investigated the role of eye movements as an indicator of what consumers like, such as tracking eyeball movement when looking at banner ads as a measure of attention. 

“Humans are visually oriented,” says Galloway. “Written language is only about 5,000 years old [...] We process visual information about 60,000 times faster than we do words. Researchers at MIT once estimated that the human brain can correctly identify an image in as little as 13 milliseconds.”

March agrees, suggesting that brands often need to do a lot more to try and capture attention - making it no surprise that purposely annoying audiences is a popular tactic by some advertisers. “50 per cent of our cortex is dedicated to visual processing. So although what we're saying is really important, how we actually communicate that information is just as important. If you compare vision to your other senses, they've got about 10 per cent of your cortex dedicated to it.” 

A good example of this, she cites, is Honda’s 2013 ‘Keep Up’ TV spot. The ad challenges audiences to keep up with the increasing speed of text flying across the screen. It’s disruptive in nature – tuning in halfway through is indeed annoying, but there’s an appeal to want to take part, start it from the beginning and play along. And it’s this ability to keep people’s attention that makes it memorable.

Perceptual psychology informs how different sensory information influences our behaviour and is just one way 'the Marmite effect' that ads have on consumers can be explained. The bouba-kiki effect, derived from the work of German psychologist Wolfgang Köhler in 1929, is a mind game that investigates the link between visuals and sound. 

Take the image above - which of the two shapes is named ‘bouba’ and which ‘kiki’? 95 per cent of people are in agreement that the rounded shape on the left is bouba and the spiked shape is kiki.

This phenomenon provides an insight into why brands can cause annoyance. With Jaguar’s rebrand, March says, people were “immediately annoyed” because of the sense of loss it created based on behavioural bias; it had shifted from kiki - power and elegance associated with a Jag - to bouba - a kind, sweet image that doesn’t correlate. 

When there is a perceived mismatch between the two (bouba being the spiky shape), researchers find the prefrontal cortex part of the brain is activated, suggesting the cognitions of memory and emotion regulation is triggered. 

For marketers, this means disruption can work wonders. Maybe pissing people off isn’t so bad after all if you want to be noticed.

An important factor that allows deliberately provoking consumers to be effective from a biological perspective is that there is more than one emotion in the messaging.

“Science shows us that emotions will activate the amygdala part of the brain that allows for memory and retaining certain information,” explains March.

“Often what we find is that the amygdala responds to certain emotions, especially stronger emotions. But the best ads and campaigns aren't actually just evoking one emotion. They're creating these more complex emotional bundles.”

Paddy Power’s recent Christmas campaign by BBH London ‘A Shirt’s Not Just For Christmas’ is a perfect example. It deliberately provokes a reaction from football fans roped into supporting a continually unsuccessful team by their parents without choice.

Associate creative directors at BBH London Luke Till and Lawrence Bushell believe that the contrasting emotions the ad provides make it relatable.  

“For Christmas, we took the mickey out of the lifetime of misery and suffering most football fans have to put up with when gifted their first football shirt,” explains Till. "Sure, on paper it could have been a bit insulting, depressing even, but because it was littered with funny insightful touches that real football fans go through, it ended up being relatable."

Bushell adds: “We think people are prepared to laugh at themselves a little as long as the humour’s delivered with care and authenticity, and feels like it’s coming from a place that resonates.”

Ads That Poked The Bear

Here is a look at a few campaigns that saw brands strike a deliberately contentious chord with some audiences.

Paddy Power

Paddy Power has long been a brand that prides itself in causing mischief. 

Across 2024, alongside BBH, the brand produced a range of cross-media campaigns that either entertain or rile sports lovers from its Euros work with actor Danny Dyer poking fun at Brits to its recent Christmas OOH campaign that boldly pokes fun at a handful of Premier League teams.

“Football is entrenched in tribalism and below-the-belt banter, so playing up to this is always going to resonate with our audience well,” explains Till. “Thanks to the rich legacy of work, and the brand the team’s built, the public expect us to push boundaries, to take the piss and point out the things everyone knows but aren’t bold enough to mention. This naturally lets us get away with a level of cheekiness other brands wouldn’t.”

Bushell continues: “A common piece of feedback we get from the Paddy team is ‘we don’t think this is daring enough’, which is not feedback you often hear working in advertising these days. We love working with them because they're prepared to go to places other brands wouldn't.” 

For Till and Bushell, getting people talking about their work - regardless of whether it has annoyed them or not, is a win. 

“Talkability is something we always aim for. We always ask, ‘would you mention this idea to your mate, share it with them even?’. When we get sent our ads on WhatsApp by people who didn't know we were involved, we know we’ve smashed it. 

“But outright controversy and outrage isn’t something we’re really courting these days. We try to appeal to our audience with wit and humour instead.”

Channel 4’s Carbon Skid Mark

Back in 2023 Channel 4 pushed the boat out in creating its ‘Carbon Skid Mark’ campaign as a part of its ‘Channel 4 Climate Change’ season. The ad takes a tongue-in-cheek approach to environmental issues in showcasing businesspeople and politicians in their underpants with oil skid marks. 

The ad proved controversial on several fronts; it received the most Ofcom complaints of all Channel 4 programmes that year, topping the list with 1,100 complaints, and also sparked debate among Conservative MPs. The channel’s CEO Alex Mahon faced questioning from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee about the ad in which Tory MP Simon Jupp labelled it as an “embarrassing” and “cheapened debate” around the topic at hand. 

Talking at the Brands & Culture conference last year, Katie Jackson, chief marketing officer at Channel 4, says the work considered the behaviour of its audience and what psychology informs about retaining information through humour. 

“What they often talk about is the physiological reaction to humour. When you laugh, you throw your head back, you open your mouth, you expose all of those vulnerable physiological parts of yourself. You are ready to receive information in an incredibly impactful way,” Jackson says. 

“Now think about what happens when someone's delivering a message very seriously to you. You slump a little bit. Might cross your legs. You might cross your arms. You are not on receive mode. And it's incredibly important to remember this when we are trying to penetrate culture with a really impactful and meaningful message humour is an extremely powerful way to do that.”

Tesco's 'ICONS'

Tesco’s out of home (OOH) ‘ICONS’ campaign had some consumers labelling it a great ad; its colours bright, its shapes thought-provoking. Collaborating with its long-term creative agency BBH, the work removes the supermarket's logo in replacement of its produce. 

The move divided opinions, however, with the majority loving the “bold and brilliant” work, while others found it “super confusing” on initial inspection.

Felipe Serradourada Guimaraes, executive creative director (ECD) at BBH London, says tampering with the supermarket's logo was never seen as taking a risk: “It’s important to stand out, be loud, and make sure our work is talked about [...] With a brand as iconic as Tesco that holds food at its heart, it made sense to literally put it front and centre, and let the food do the talking.”

Guimaraes explains the mix of opinions is one that is welcomed: “The level of debate we got was pleasantly surprising. We got a sense that people were yearning for really simple bold work, and I think that’s kind of what we did.”

System 1’s SVP Andrew Tindall says OOH creativity is all about having fun - and Tesco’s work is a prime example. 

'Nothing Satisfies Like A Pot Noodle'

In 2023 Pot Noddle found a way to trigger audiences in such extraordinary fashion the ad was pulled – all because it featured the sound of loud slurping. Audiences saw their fight or flight response kicking into gear, especially those with misophonia – the hatred of loud sounds such as chewing.

A flurry of debate kick-started on social media, where watchers didn’t hold back their negative opinions - it only takes a brief look at the YouTube comments to see the mass disdain for the slurping sound.

A remastered version of the ad was released, by Pot Noddle's creative agency adam&eveDDB, poking fun at the adverse reactions it received. It sees a tongue-in-cheek apology plastered across the screen and the slurping noise replaced with a playful ‘nom-nom’ noise. 

“Our original ‘Slurp’ campaign received a lot of noise across X. We always knew that the ad would be noticeable and potentially divisive,” admits Pot Noodle marketing manager, Lena Portchmouth. 

Mark Shanley, creative director at adam&eveDDB, adds that the ad was an attempt to “celebrate the immense satisfaction people feel whilst eating a pot noodle”.

“We re-targeted everyone who skipped the ad when the slurping started and produced nearly fifty brand new edits tailored specifically to them using audio from things their data told us they actually do find satisfying," he explains.