Brand activism that divides: coherence or noise

A brand activism strategy rests on a single measure: the distance between what a brand says and what it does. That is where brand reputation is built, or spent.

A brand that takes a stand steps onto ground where consensus counts for little and coherence counts for everything. Think of campaigns that overturn advertising logic, going so far as to question their own consumption in order to strengthen an identity bond with a territory or a cause. Ichnusa offers a clear example of this logic: the campaign “Se deve finire così, non beveteci nemmeno” (“If it has to end this way, don’t even drink us”) translates into advertising a commitment already rooted in the brand’s history, well beyond a simple call against littering. The protection of Sardinia, of its landscape and its symbolic value, becomes an integral part of the message, making the brand’s voice credible precisely because it is coherent with what the brand has been telling for years. In this sense, the campaign reads as a natural extension of brand positioning, built on a story already told.

At the opposite end sit more irreverent and provocative moves, betting on attention and engagement. Uber Eats Australia, with the campaign “Get Almost, Almost Anything, Maybe Even Andy Murray”, belongs to this grammar: an operation staged as an ironic hunt for the tennis player, turned into the object of an imaginary delivery and placed at the centre of a deliberately disorienting narrative. The result is a campaign that generates conversation and memorability, yet is also exposed to the risk of being read as excessive or opportunistic. Two distant roads, one shared question: when does a brand’s stand build identity, and when does it generate only noise? For anyone working in communication, the answer carries precise operational implications.

The capital at stake is brand reputation

Brand activism moves a brand from the terrain of the product to the terrain of values. It is a shift that raises the stakes. An audience that appreciates a stand grants trust; the same audience, faced with an inconsistency, withdraws it just as fast.

Institutional communication knows this dynamic well. A declared commitment becomes a public promise, and every public promise generates verifiable expectations. A brand that takes a position on a social or environmental issue accepts being measured on its behaviour. Facts weigh more than intentions. The coherence between message and corporate conduct becomes the true unit of measure for reputation.

Ichnusa: when brand activism rests on roots

The Ichnusa case works because the message is born inside the brand’s identity. The defence of Sardinian territory is coherent with a positioning history built over the years on belonging. The campaign lands as credible because the audience recognises continuity between what the brand says today and what it has always told.

This is the operational lesson for anyone building brand narratives: a stand holds when it has roots. A value communicated out of nowhere, disconnected from the company’s history and practices, stays exposed to the first test. A rooted value becomes reputational capital that accumulates over time.

Uber Eats and the creativity that pushes the edge

The Uber Eats Australia move belongs to a different grammar: that of irony and provocation. It works on the level of attention and builds conversation. It lives, however, in a border zone, where creative brilliance meets the risk of opportunism.

The distinction matters. A creative provocation that entertains and stays inside a coherent brand tone enriches identity. A provocation that chases only reaction, with no substance behind it, spends attention and leaves little behind. For the communicator, the question to ask before every campaign stays the same: does this gesture tell who we are, or does it chase a reaction regardless of who we are?

The risks of brand activism: the border with opportunism

Brand activism divides because it touches a public nerve: the suspicion that the declared value serves to sell. Audiences have grown competent at reading that distance. They recognise the authentic position, rooted in verifiable behaviour, and they recognise the opportunism that rides a sensitive issue for a return in visibility. It is the same threshold beyond which a campaign slips into greenwashing or woke washing.

For an agency that supports companies in complex sectors, the responsibility is to help the client stay on the right side of that border. It means working upstream: verifying that the communicated commitment finds a match in practice, building narratives that hold up under scrutiny, guarding coherence as a strategic asset before it is an ethical choice. Communication comes at the end of a path; substance comes first.

Earning the distinction

Brand activism is a choice of vision, with all the risks a vision carries. It builds identity when it rests on coherence between message and behaviour, and it wears thin when it chases reaction without the substance to sustain it.

Audiences have learned to tell the difference. An effective brand activism strategy helps brands earn that distinction: speak when there is something real to defend, and stay silent when the only thing at stake is visibility. Coherence remains the hardest strategy, and the most durable.