The social media villain arc: subversion in marketing

Marketing has long been about interest-seeking, but the internet has evolved from being a social sphere where millennials would create web pages dedicated to their pet, to a battlefield of brands, creators and social users grappling for a fraction of our time and attention.

Attention is the most valuable currency, and some brands are bordering on lunacy in an attempt to earn it.

Outrage marketing, also known as subversive marketing, is a strategy where brands, creators and public figures use controversy, provocation, or audacity to stir conversation and capture the spotlight. But is this approach genius or reckless? And does it truly drive long-term success, or is it just a fast track to being cancelled?

Celebs like Kanye West, and Elon Musk have monetised outrage and they dominate conversations around online rebellion, and brands like Burger King, Balenciaga, and Crocs have turned polarisation into profit by leaning into the 'ugly' aesthetic and shock-factor.

Key trends

• Outrage cycles have fuelled viral success, but at what cost? Backlash spreads instantly, brands and influencers who stir controversy can become targets of cancel culture. Kanye West monetised controversy for years, but he crossed a line, leading to his Yeezy brand deal with Adidas collapsing overnight.

• People are becoming more sceptical and aware of predictable marketing, we notice those subtle product placements and we aren't falling for false product review videos, making subversion an effective way to capture attention, as long as it's done well.

• We expect brands to do better. Shock-factor content is meaningless if there's no substance in the values that underpin the challenge.

Why controversy sells

From Elon Musk's provocative tweets to Trump's shock-driven campaigns, we've seen first-hand how outrage fuels attention. These figures thrive on controversy, whether by making bold claims, picking public fights, or making decisions that seem intentionally divisive. They dominate conversations, ensuring that they remain at the centre of public discourse - whether loved or hated.

Brands are taking notes. Businesses understand that playing it safe doesn't always cut it anymore.

But while controversy can boost engagement, it also comes with risks. If brands lean too far into outrage without a strong foundation of values, they risk losing trust and credibility.

TL;DR: Controversy fuels attention. Figures like Elon Musk and Trump use shock tactics to dominate public discourse. Brands are taking note - playing it safe isn't always enough. But without strong values, controversy can erode trust.

Outrage marketing in action

Enter Burger King, Balenciaga, and Crocs, who are making their millions by embracing the "ugly" aesthetic, shock-factor marketing, and sometimes outright trolling their audience.

Burger King: the fast-food rebel

Burger King has mastered playful provocation, often taking digs at competitors and engaging in marketing that feels like an inside joke between the brand and its audience. One notable example is its infamous "Moldy Whopper" campaign, where the brand showcased a decomposing Whopper to highlight the absence of artificial preservatives. The campaign sparked debate - was it disgusting or genius? Either way, it got people talking.

Balenciaga: the luxury brand of absurdity

Balenciaga has leaned into absurdity and shock-factor marketing, turning everyday objects into overpriced luxury goods. From $1,500 'trash-bag' handbags to scuffed-up shoes sold for $1,850, the brand intentionally blurs the line between high fashion and satire. Critics call it a joke, but fans see it as a bold artistic statement - and the constant discourse keeps Balenciaga firmly in the headlines.

Crocs: from uncool to cult fave

Crocs transformed its perception from an ugly, unfashionable shoe brand into an ironic, must-have statement piece. By collaborating with high-fashion designers and celebrities, Crocs embraced the so bad it's good aesthetic, turning their once-ridiculed product into an icon of self-aware, rebellious style.

TL;DR: Burger King, Balenciaga, and Crocs thrive on shock-factor marketing.

• Burger King: pushed boundaries with campaigns like the "Moldy Whopper," sparking debate but proving a point.

• Balenciaga: satirical luxury, turning absurd items into overpriced fashion statements.

• Crocs: transformed from ugly to trendy by embracing irony and bold collaborations.

When subversion backfires

While subversion can drive engagement, it's a tightrope walk. Some brands and individuals have pushed too far and suffered the consequences.

Kanye West & Yeezy: the downfall of a controversial genius

Kanye West built his Yeezy empire partially on shock factor, making bold statements and stirring controversy to stay in the news cycle. However, his extreme rhetoric eventually led to real-world consequences - major brand partners like Adidas dropped him, resulting in significant financial losses. His case proves that controversy has its limits, and once the public turns on you, recovery can be difficult.

Pepsi & the Kendall Jenner protest Ad

Pepsi's protest ad featuring Kendall Jenner attempting to solve social justice issues with a can of soda was a disaster. It oversimplified a complex issue, the idea that a can of Pepsi could resolve deep-rooted societal tensions was not only unrealistic but offensive to many. The attempt was seen as tone-deaf and exploitative, resulting in immediate backlash. Pepsi's campaign lacked authenticity, making it feel more like a marketing misstep than a bold statement.

Watch if you want to cringe so badly you'll feel the urge to hide under your desk.

TL;DR: Playing with controversy can go wrong.

• Kanye West & Yeezy: used controversy for attention but pushed too far, leading to the loss of his partnership with Adidas.

• Pepsi's Kendall Jenner Ad: tried to capitalise on activism but came across as tone-deaf and inauthentic.

How to make outrage marketing successful

Substance over shock

So, what separates brands that achieve outlandish marketing from those that fail to hit the mark? The difference is purpose. Outrage for the sake of engagement feels empty and often leads to backlash. But when subversion is backed by a strong message, brand values, or clever cultural commentary, it can stand out for the right reasons.

How brands can use subversion without losing trust

• Know your audience; some demographics thrive on edgy personality and controversy, while others value sincerity and trust. Understand who you're speaking to before taking risks.

• Have a clear message; outrage should never be the whole strategy - it needs to serve a larger purpose. Burger King's Whopper campaign worked because it was ultimately about natural ingredients.

• Stay true to your brand identity; Crocs embracing their ugly aesthetic works because it aligns with their self-aware, quirky brand voice. A luxury brand trying the same approach might struggle.

• Don't exploit serious issues for clicks; Pepsi's protest ad failed because it tried to profit off activism without truly engaging in the movement. If a brand wants to enter social conversations, it must do so authentically.

• Prepare for pushback; outrage marketing will always rub some people up the wrong way. Brands using this strategy should anticipate backlash and have a crisis response plan in place.

A clever marketing tactic?

Outrage marketing is undeniably effective - but it's also volatile. Brands that master subversion do so with intent, cultural awareness or for fun. Those that use controversy as a gimmick risk losing credibility.

Ask yourself: are we creating conversation, or are we just creating chaos for the sake of chaos?

Done right, subversion can break through the noise and make brands unforgettable. Done wrong, it can alienate audiences and lead to long-term reputational damage.

Not every business can pull off a villain era. Brands should calculate risks carefully - controversy can spark engagement, but trust and reputation matter.

What do you think?

Is controversy a smart strategy, or is it a ticking time bomb? Have any brands mastered the art of subversion in a way that resonates with you?

Rachel Lyndon-Jones is Co-Founder and CMO of Ouma, a strategic growth partner helping ambitious UK businesses build connected growth systems. Rachel's work sits at the intersection of marketing psychology, brand trust and commercial strategy, helping businesses understand not just what to do, but why it works.