Is ‘controversial’ good for your brand?

By Andy Wright

A short post this week in the middle of the Xmas holidays. Driving out to the in-laws I passed a billboard ad for an iconic, Australian brand with some good Brandhabits - Aerogard. For those of you not in Australia, Aerogard is mosquito repellent and has been around in Australia for years. It first became famous during a visit by Queen Elizabeth II in 1963 when after a day of swatting flies, she was given Aerogard to spray. The next day the journalists following the Queen noticed that the flies had miraculously disappeared. The rumours spread and word of mouth kicked into overdrive.

Aerogard ad

Then, in the 80′s (I think) the slogan of ‘Remember the Aerogard and Avagoodweekend‘ was coined. It became part of Aussie vocabulary and the brand was well known for being trusted, reliable and family friendly. The slogan isn’t perhaps quite as famous and iconic as ‘Not Happy Jan’ or ‘Happy Little Vegemites’ but it’s certainly in the top tier of Aussie brands.

That’s why I was surprised to see this ad. A TV campaign earlier in the year focused on family and friends in a boat on the river, spraying the Aerogard to keep the Mosquito’s away. It was quite a typical Australian friends / family setting. Spot on for the Aerogard brand.

I’m all for attention grabbing, hard hitting, engaging advertising. But it shouldn’t take priority over the brand equity that has been built up over considerable time and investment. It seems to me to be a short-term tactic that doesn’t necessarily add to Aerogard’s brand equity or that is in fact own-able by Aerogard. It’s an ad that is category generic and would be as equally impactful and fitting for one of Aerogard’s competitors.

It’s also an ad that conflicts with the Australian spirit and good will. To give blood, is to do good and it’s well known that the Red Cross could do with all the help they can get. The ad has caused some displeasure with the public, although perhaps not on a mass scale. The Aerogard team knew this might be an issue and in fairness, consulted the Red Cross beforehand. But perhaps this should have been a warning sign that such an idea might not be seen as socially responsible.

Personally, I think it’s a good idea and a simple execution. I just don’t think it’s right for Aerogard.

Being controversial is a great way to grab attention and share of mind. There are a number of controversial brands in the world that do this to varying effects. However, the difference is that they have controversial or ‘edgy’ in their DNA. Brands like, Nando’s, the new Cocaine energy drink, United Colors of Benetton, Amnesty International have all taken a stance as part of their long-term brand strategy. Nando’s is a more recent example and one that I’m unsure of its potential to result in success, but they are continuing to back it.

If you’re looking for a new advertising campaign in 2010 or a new direction for your brand, make sure that you consider your brand’s equity and heritage carefully. Controversy is a great short term tactic and can increase awareness and interest in your brand for immediate consideration and sales. But, consider if it’s the right Brandhabit to develop for your brand in the long term. Does it add and continue to build brand equity? What follows this campaign / direction? If you’re not sure, it might not be right…