The Upside of Down: Why Negative Ads Can Be Positively Brilliant

Not to be negative but…I’m getting kind of sick of feedback about negativity.

One of the most common pieces of feedback we receive on ideas (and it seems to me to be increasing over time) is “it feels a bit negative”. What clients are referring to here is any idea that paints their brand in a negative light in any way. Some real examples I’ve experienced myself include in response to an idea describing a brand as ‘challenging conventions’, to an ad that highlighted pain points which the brand played a role in solving, or even one client who didn’t want to use the phrase “don’t forget” for fear of it sounding too negative.

Of course, it’s understandable for marketers to have a natural aversion to seeing their brand portrayed in a negative light. They are the brand guardians, and it’s their job to ensure people consider, buy and ideally even love their brand. But is ‘negative’ advertising really such a bad thing? And by shutting down anything that may be perceived as negative, do we miss out on the opportunity to create more interesting, memorable and therefore effective work?

Let’s look at some examples of brands that have used ‘negative’ angles in their work. Take Lyles Golden Syrup. Their campaign ‘Sticky But Worth It’ leaned into a product truth that would perhaps feel negative to some - the fact that the product is extremely sticky and tends to make a mess. Instead of focusing on their taste credentials, they decided to show the product getting stuck on countertops, lids getting suctioned to iPads, spoons sinking into the tin...it’s almost uncomfortable to watch at times. In fact, the top comment on YouTube is “this triggers me”. But it’s a campaign that’s always stuck (excuse the pun) in my head for exactly that reason.

And that’s not the only brand that has successfully leveraged the power of negativity. Buckley’s ‘It Tastes Awful. And It Works’, Avis ‘We Try Harder’ and Marmite ‘Love It Or Hate It’ are all examples of famous and highly effective advertising rooted in a negative brand or product truth. Perhaps most concerning (albeit unsurprising) about the campaigns I’ve mentioned so far is the fact that almost* all were all created over a decade ago (*Lyle’s is nine years old). It’s much more difficult to find famous and/or highly effective examples of ads these days that take the negative approach. So, what does this say about the state of marketing at the moment?

The problem is not just that marketers are seemingly less comfortable with ‘negative’ advertising. It’s the fact that they are also increasingly comfortable creating dull, wallpaper advertising that elicits no reaction whatsoever, with more than 80% of ads failing to pass the attention threshold needed to make an impact on brand building. When we compare the two, playing it safe is undoubtedly the riskier strategy. Low attention driving advertising, which has skyrocketed in the past decade, has led to an estimated €1.2 billion in wasted advertising each year in Ireland alone. Compare this to the fact that leveraging negative emotions is proven to have large memory effects, which is key for long-term brand building. Our natural tendency to pay more attention to negative stimuli compared with positive or neutral stimuli (known as Negativity Bias) is to thank for this hack. Weighing up the two options, taking a punt on an idea that’s rooted in a negative insight seems like a much safer bet to me.

We’ve seen proof of the power of negativity for ourselves through our own research from The Interesting Index, our quarterly research experiment which tracks what ads people remember and why. Although positive emotions are more commonly linked to the ads people remember, on average 11% of ads are linked to a negative emotion such as sadness, anger or disgust. Compare this to the roughly 6% of respondents who typically describe the ads they remember as ‘boring’. In other words, people are almost twice as likely to remember something negative than something dull or boring. And with memorability being a cornerstone of effectiveness for brands, we can’t afford to ignore this.

Last summer, the number one most remembered ad was Sky Stream’s ‘End the ehhh’ campaign, in which over 30 seconds of the ad is filled with a man saying “ehhh” as he tries to decide what to watch on TV. Half (50%) of respondents selected ‘annoyed’ as the emotion linked to it, with some commenting that it’s “so annoying it's memorable.” However, as a result of this strong reaction, it was also remembered in great detail, with respondents correctly identifying the product name and benefits of the service. Interestingly, the long “ehhh” seems to have been cut out of the latest version of the ad, presumably in response to concerns it was annoying viewers. I wonder what the impact on attention and recall has been since making that change, though…

Although it’s valid to be concerned about your brand being seen in a negative light, advertising that leverages negativity doesn’t always elicit a negative response. In fact, most of the time this approach is used in such a way as to elicit a positive reaction. For example, Burger King’s Mouldy Whopper which portrayed the brand’s hero product in perhaps the worst, most unappetising light, led to an 88% increase in positive brand perception and actually convinced people that the fast food giant is more natural than its competitors. Something tells me a campaign merely promoting its use of natural ingredients wouldn’t have had the same impact on memorability. As a matter of fact, I know it wouldn’t have…because they have run tons of campaigns about their natural ingredients and most are utterly forgettable. I just can’t help but wonder how many marketers would have bought the Mouldy Whopper idea when first presented, and how many would have put the all too familiar “it feels a bit negative” nail in the coffin.

At the end of the day, we are in the business of persuasion and as Joe Burns brilliantly puts it, “advertising has to feel like something a brain already half-believed”. People are experts at smelling bullshit, and presenting your brand as the most perfect, rosy version of itself at all times can be all too easy to discount as marketing nonsense. Humans need a plucky imperfection to root for, and it’s this element that often forms the most memorable & distinctive part of a story, regardless of where we encounter it. Think Elizabeth Bennet’s pride (and prejudice), Bruce Wayne’s crippling emotional repression, or John McClane’s lack of shoes - the weaknesses make the story more interesting, the challenges more relatable, and the resolution more ownable to an audience who are themselves real and imperfect.

An elf who never ages and can’t feel pain is unrelatable.

A syrup that doesn’t make everything it touches sticky as hell?

We’re not buying that either.