17603: The Naked Truth About Sydney Sweeney’s Novig Controversy.

 

Adweek spotlighted a new Sydney Sweeney controversy, noting the actress has gone from inciting ire with her wardrobe to doing likewise with no clothing.

The latest outcry is for a campaign hyping Novig, a sports prediction market and trading app, which protestors complain is insulting female athletes.

Okay, except research indicates most people interested in services like Novig—over 70%—are young males. So, a naked Sweeney is probably perfectly appealing to the target audience.

The American Eagle advertising offended people of color, while the Novig promotion pisses off White women—a group that has historically wielded greater power and influence than minorities.

In short, this scenario might pose more damage to Novig than Sweeney delivered to American Eagle.

Bet on it.

One Year Post-American Eagle Scandal, Sydney Sweeney Sparks Ire by Going Naked for Novig

The ad has received backlash for reversing years of gains for female athletes

By Robert Klara

Last August, Sydney Sweeney broke the internet with American Eagle spots showing her in a too-tight top and struggling with the zipper of her jeans.

In her new campaign for Novig, Sweeney has solved those wardrobe problems: She’s not wearing anything at all.

“Today, we at Novig unveiled out first national brand campaign featuring Sweeney,” the sports prediction app announced on its website, “bringing to life our belief that the best sports trading experience comes from a platform singularly focused on sports.”

The campaign’s title is “Just Sports.” But judging from the heated response from the public, “Just Sex” might have been a better title. 

Though some men have expressed appreciation for the work (one calling it “better than any sports playing right now,”) women have largely responded with disappointment and anger.

The problem isn’t showing skin, per se (advertising is already full of that). But at a time when female athletes have just begun inching toward parity in pay and fame, people feel Sweeney has turned back the clock to the Playboy era.

“I can’t describe how infuriated I feel when I watch this,” Australian gold-medalist swimmer Ariane Titmus wrote on Instagram, referring to Sweeney’s ads as “a kick in the face to every woman who has dedicated her life to perfecting her craft.”

Women outside the sports realm have expressed their dismay, too.

“Every great female athlete has used her platform to create movement, challenge norms, inspire change and make an impact,” AI executive Indigo Haddington responded on Sweeney’s Instagram page. “All she’s done is get paid for what she’s known for: her body.”

It’s unlikely that Novig or Sweeney were under any illusions that this campaign was about “just sports” in a literal sense. What’s beyond dispute is that the campaign takes a page from a playbook written long ago—a legacy that Sweeney herself seems to have nodded to in her response to the backlash: a post with a series of photos showing athletes, including MMA star Ronda Rousey and football beefcake Rob Gronkowski, showing plenty of skin.

Even so, even in advertising, a revealing image is one thing; a lasciviousness message is another. In 1971, National Airlines ran ads starring their leggy flight attendants who invited businessmen to “fly me.” In the early 2000s, Axe’s notorious “Billions” ad depicted a tribe of libidinous women chasing down a man who’d just used Axe body spray.

And while evidence is mixed that sex really increases sales, a 2013 study published in the Journal of Advertising found that “males evaluate ads with sexual appeals significantly more positively than females.” And when it comes to sports betting, one recent estimate suggested that 70% of the bettors are men.

Not that there’s no upside for the 29-year-old Sweeney, who’s not just the femme fatale here; she’s a partner and equity stakeholder, too.

17160: Improving The Jean/Gene Pool.

Gap keeps it simple and sexy with KATSEYE, hyping its Fall apparel via “Better in Denim.”

 

It’s better than American Eagle.

17153: Headlining American Eagle Sales, Stock, And Sex Appeal.

 

Adweek published content with a headline and subhead reading: American Eagle Ad Controversy Hasn’t Driven Sales, Early Data Suggests—More than three weeks after its Sydney Sweeney campaign lit the internet on fire, the retailer’s market share remains flat.

 

About a week ago, Adweek published content with a headline and subhead reading: American Eagle Sees Biggest Daily Jump in 25 Years After Trump Backs Sydney Sweeney Ad—The president’s support pushed the brand’s stock up 24% on Monday.

 

So, what’s the real headline?

 

Sydney Sweeney hasn’t got great-selling genes—or jeans.

17147: More American Eagle Droppings.

 

FOX News reported President Donald J. Trump and Vice President JD Vance weighed in on the American Eagle “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Genes/Jeans” campaign.

 

Upon learning Sweeney is a registered Republican, Trump gushed, “Oh, now I love her ad. … I think her ad is fantastic.”

 

For further context, consider Trump’s view on immigrants delivered while campaigning in 2024: “How about allowing people to come to an open border, 13,000 of which were murderers. … Many of them murdered far more than one person, and they’re now happily living in the United States. … You know, now a murderer, I believe this, it’s in their genes. And we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now.” 

 

As for Vance, his American Eagle campaign critique included: “My political advice to the Democrats is continue to tell everybody who thinks Sydney Sweeney is attractive is a Nazi. That appears to be their actual strategy.”

 

For further context, Vance’s pre-VP criticism of Trump included calling the president an “idiot” and referring to him as “America’s Hitler.”

 

In short, Trump and Vance appear to be genetically predisposed to spewing bullshit.

 

Trump says he now ‘loves’ Sydney Sweeney American Eagle ad after learning she’s a registered Republican

 

President’s comments come after mixed social media reactions to ‘Great Jeans’ campaign

 

By Sophia Compton

 

President Trump on Sunday reacted positively upon learning actress Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, adding that he now finds her viral American Eagle ad campaign to be “fantastic.”

 

“She’s a registered Republican?” Trump said in response to a reporter’s question about his thoughts on her political affiliation. “Oh, now I love her ad.”

 

The President added, “You’d be surprised at how many people are Republicans. That’s what I wouldn’t have known, but I’m glad you told me that. If Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic.”

 

The “Euphoria” actress’ voter registration has surfaced as she faces backlash for her controversial American Eagle jeans campaign. Since June 2024, she has been registered with the Republican Party of Florida in Monroe County, the New York Post reported, citing public voter records.

 

Earlier this week, American Eagle released their latest campaign with the actress, titled “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.” Following the launch, there was a mix of reactions on social media.

 

Some critics said the billboard’s play on “genes” versus “jeans” echoed eugenics-era slogans, though supporters argued it was a lighthearted marketing gimmick.

 

Some dubbed the campaign as “tone-deaf” due to the alleged racial undertones, while others have praised the actress for killing “woke” advertising.

 

In a promo video posted to the brand’s Instagram, the 27-year-old walked toward an AE billboard featuring her and the tagline “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Genes.” Sweeney crossed out “Genes” and replaced it with “Jeans” before walking away.

 

On Friday, Vice President JD Vance had some fun at the expense of the left over its wild response to the American Eagle ad campaign featuring actress Sydney Sweeney.

 

“My political advice to the Democrats is continue to tell everybody who thinks Sydney Sweeney is attractive is a Nazi. That appears to be their actual strategy,” Vance joked during Friday’s appearance on the “Ruthless” podcast.

 

Fox News Digital’s Janelle Ash and Joseph A. Wulfsohn contributed to this report.

17143: Mad Men, Moronic Messages, Monumental Miscues, Marketing Myths.

 

Digiday published a diagnosis on the genetic disorders affecting recent American Eagle and Dunkin’ campaigns.

 

Mythbusted: American Eagle and Dunkin’ and the risk of ignoring cultural context in ads

 

By Seb Joseph

 

American Eagle has joined the increasingly long list of brands that somehow didn’t see it coming. 

 

Like Bud Light, Target and Jaguar Land Rover before it, the retailer stepped into the culture wars with the kind of casual confidence that suggests senior marketers are still underestimating how combustible “just another campaign” can be. In this case, it was an ad featuring a white, blue-eyed blond film star Sydney Sweeney praising the culture of “good jeans” — a line that might’ve passed without notice a decade ago, now reads more like a Rorschach test for who brands think they’re speaking to. 

 

It landed awkwardly amid ongoing cultural scrutiny of representation, identity and who gets to be the face of America cool. And it didn’t help that Dunkin’ had just aired an ad with actor Gavin Casalegno boasting that his sun-kissed glow came down to “genetics.”

 

Together, the two campaigns are more signs of a persistent blind spot: the belief that cultural relevance can be manufactured without risk or that casting choices are neutral. They’re not. And the surprise, at this point, feels less like naivete and more like denial. 

 

The myths marketing tells itself — that it can borrow from culture without participating in it, that nostalgia is safe, that representation is a box to check — are showing their cracks. Again. 

 

Myth: “We had diverse people in the room so we’re good.”

 

Reality: Representation in the room doesn’t mean influence in the decision-making. Junior staffers, freelancers or DEI advisors can’t always challenge risk-averse CMOs. Cultural fluency isn’t just about headcount, it’s about authority. 

 

“The problem is the conflation of diversity and inclusivity,” said Leila Fataar, founder of brand consultancy Platform13. A brand may have the right people in the room, whether inhouse or through their agencies, but if the company (either brand or agency) is not inclusive, where diverse voices feel empowered to challenge and be both heard and listened to, then it doesn’t matter.”

 

Myth: “This talent isn’t political. They’re safe.”

 

Reality: In this polarized climate, no one’s safe. Whether it’s Sydney Sweeney’s conservative family ties or queer influencer with activist roots, everything is politicized after launch. The idea that you can pick someone “neutral” is a myth. The reality is that too many marketers still tend to define “safe” by proximity to whiteness or likability, which is its own bias. 

 

“We all see brands through our culture stack, as explained in detail in my book, Culture Led Brands,” said Fataar. “That means brand messages (and therefore brands), whether intentional or not, are and have always been determined and perceived against the backdrop of the politics and policies of that era, the media and technological adoption.”

 

Myth: “The backlash is just trolls or bots. Ignore it.” 

 

Reality: Sometimes that’s true — but not always. Real people often have real critiques on who gets spotlighted, who’s left out or what a campaign subtly signals — inadvertently or not. Dismissing it as noise can blind brands to underlying patterns that keep resurfacing. 

 

Myth: “We did the DEI work in 2020 — we’ve moved on.”

 

Reality: Many brands built out DEI during the post-George Floyd reckoning. But few embedded it into creative strategy, casting pipelines or vendor selection. It was often PR insulation, not infrastructure. And that’s how you get blind spots.

 

Myth: “We can fix it with a statement later.”

 

Reality: Statements don’t work when people don’t trust the system behind them. If your team lacks cultural context or your agency has no equity in communities you’re trying to reach, then the damage is already done. 

 

Myth: “If it performs well on social media, it must be working.”

 

Reality: Metrics like engagement, reach and sentiment are often shallow indicators of cultural resonance. A campaign might be getting clicks because its controversial — or because it’s being hate-shared. Not all virality is good ROI, and not all engagement reflects alignment with brand values. 

 

Myth: “Our agency “gets it” — they’ve worked on inclusive campaigns before.”

 

Reality: Just because an agency can name-drop a few inclusive wins doesn’t mean they’re equipped to navigate the nuances of every campaign. Cultural competency isn’t one size fits all and too many agencies still use the same mostly-white creative teams to execute work aimed at broad, diverse audiences.

 

Myth: “We can just add a diverse influencer to the mix and call it balanced.”

 

Reality: Tokenism disguised as inclusivity is not progress. Sticking in one Black or Brown creator next to a celebrity with a complicated track record doesn’t resolve the underlying disconnect — it amplifies it. 

 

“Representation isn’t a casting decision. Placing a diverse face in a campaign is surface-level inclusion,” said Sunny Bonnell, founder and CEO of brand transformation agency Motto. “True representation shows up in the values a brand upholds, the stories it prioritizes, the power it redistributes, and the people who sit at the decision-making table.”

 

Myth: “If we don’t say anything political, we’ll stay out of trouble.”

 

Reality: Silence is a political stance now. Whether you want to or not, brands are operating in a landscape where neutrality is interpreted — and often weaponized. You don’t have to be performative, but you can’t pretend cultural context doesn’t exist. 

 

Myth: “The backlash caught us off guard.”

 

Reality: Not always. Sometimes, the backlash is the point. Certain campaigns are crafted to poke the cultural bear, banking on the idea that a little outrage can boost impressions, trend on social and earn media coverage without spending on marketing. It’s a familiar play: provoke just enough to stir debate, ride the controversy then retreat into vague brand speak. The catch? It’s a short-term hack that chips away at long-term trust — especially with the audiences a marketer claims to champion.

17142: Failing On Genetic Testing Action Day.

 

July 25, 2025, was the first Genetic Testing Action Day.

 

Gee, American Eagle and Dunkin’ missed a promotional opportunity…

17141: Dunkin’ Golden Hour Refresher Refreshes Genetics Controversy.

 

Adweek reported Dunkin’ is getting a golden shower for its Golden Hour Refresher advertisement, which makes a reference to genetics.

 

It might be a case of bad timing, as the public is still processing the American Eagle “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Genes/Jeans” campaign.

 

Or it might be a case of the responsible creative teams at Dunkin’ and American Eagle having cultural cluelessness in their DNA.

 

Dunkin’ Faces Backlash Over Genetics Reference in New Ad 

 

Consumers are hyperaware of the topic amid outcry over American Eagle’s Sydney Sweeney campaign

 

By Elena Cavender

 

Dunkin’s latest ad, released on the heels of American Eagle’s new campaign starring Sydney Sweeney, is facing backlash on social media for mentioning genetics.

 

The ad stars The Summer I Turned Pretty star Gavin Casalengo and promotes Dunkin’s Golden Hour Refresher by playing on the actor’s “golden” tanned skin.

 

The spot came out days after American Eagle’s “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans” campaign, which has drawn criticism for alleged racist undertones and promoting eugenics due to its celebration of Sweeney’s genes. In the ad, the blonde hair, blue-eyed actress says, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color.”

 

While the Dunkin’ ad’s mention of genetics is subtler, it has struck a nerve for praising traits associated with white beauty ideals while mentioning genetics. In the ad, Casalengo says, “This tan? Genetics. I just got my color analysis back and guess what? Golden summer.” Color analysis refers to the beauty trend of picking colors that look best on based on skin tone.

 

The pushback against the Dunkin’ ad might have more to do with the timing of the ad than the content itself. But consumers were quick to comment on Dunkin’s YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok accounts to point out the troubling trend of mentioning genetics in advertising and to leverage accusations of racism. 

 

Dunkin’s TikTok post of the ad received over 1.3 million views at the time of writing. One comment reads, “What’s up with ads and the word genetics rn” received over 25,000 likes. Another comment says, “So no American Eagle or Dunkin’, got it,” garnered nearly 2,000 likes. 

 

Like with the American Eagle campaign, TikTokers are posting standalone videos on the controversy. One creator posted a video arguing it’s especially odd for Dunkin’ to mention genetics given that unlike the American Eagle ad, there is no gene-related pun. It received over 36,000 views at the time of writing. 

 

Dunkin’ did not respond to ADWEEK’s request for comment.

17140: Gene Therapy For Ailing Brand Produces Amazing Results.

Adweek dove into the gene pool of publications, pundits, podcasts, and pinheads opining on the American Eagle campaign starring Sydney Sweeney and her great genes/jeans.

 

No need to conduct a genealogical study, as the historical and hysterical details have been examined ad nauseum.

 

The scenario exposes a Darwinian devolution for liberals and conservatives alike.

 

The left side called out the tone deafness and cultural cluelessness of playing off eugenics and its racist overtones.

 

The right side pooh-poohed the offended with accusations of overreactive political correctness and over-the-top wokeness.

 

Meanwhile, American Eagle flew away, seemingly oblivious to having created a nationwide campaign that excluded a significant segment of Americans.

 

Expect campaign extensions featuring Gene Simmons.

 

How American Eagle’s Sydney Sweeney Ads Became a Culture War Flashpoint 

 

The brand has removed at least one video following ‘pro-eugenics’ accusations

 

By Rebecca Stewart and Robert Klara

 

‘Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans,’ declared American Eagle last Tuesday (July 22) in a series of wordplay-laden social ads and a Times Square billboard promoting its fall collection, fronted by the Euphoria and White Lotus star. 

 

On Thursday, American Eagle’s stock had jumped 7%. By Friday, the brand was facing a media firestorm that accused it of promoting “pro-eugenics” ideals—a jarring misstep in an America grappling with a rightward shift.

 

Outrage was sparked by dialogue from one particular video (which now appears to be removed from several social platforms) in which Sweeney says: “My body’s composition is determined by my genes.”

 

As the camera focuses on her breasts, she scolds the operator, “Hey, eyes are up here,” before continuing: “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color.” The camera pans to her eyes. “My jeans are blue,” she finishes.

 

Critics on TikTok, LinkedIn, and X have called the messaging a “racist dogwhistle,” claiming the creative direction, alongside images of the blue-eyed, blonde-haired star, was a nod to “Nazi” eugenics, an ideology which idealized Aryan features and sought to eliminate or suppress those who didn’t possess them.

 

Before the backlash, American Eagle’s chief marketing officer (CMO) Craig Brommers described Sweeney’s endorsement as one of the “biggest gets in American Eagle history.”

 

He told ADWEEK that the “pressure was on” for the investment to deliver following a $68 million adjusted operating loss for the business in the first quarter of 2025, owing to the impact of tariffs, product misses, and a cold spring.

 

ADWEEK reached out to American Eagle and its PR agency, Shadow, requesting an updated statement on the campaign. They did not respond; however, the brand has removed the film of Sweeney stating that her jeans are blue from several of its online channels, including YouTube and Instagram.

 

American Controversy

 

Reactions to the ad ran the gamut, and so did expert opinions on what caused the backlash. 

 

For veteran brand strategist Jean-Pierre Lacroix, author of books including Desire by Design, the pushback against American Eagle is less about a moral offense than it is a cry of disenfranchisement. 

 

Amid a swing to the right under President Trump, and corporate America’s recent backsliding on DEI initiatives, social progressives are feeling a loss of ground, said Lacroix.

 

This segment of consumers “feels like society has revolted against them, so they have portrayed this ad as the manifestation of a move away from diversity and inclusion,” observed Lacroix. “They’re reaching because they’re wounded, and they’re looking for a visual metaphor that validates their position. This ad became a lightning rod.”

 

Dory Ellis Garfinkle, CMO of global brand consultancy Siegel+Gale, suggested that the outcry over the ad may be missing the larger point that American Eagle could be ginning up outrage for its own sake.

 

“Rather than what the controversy is all about, what is more interesting is that a brand like American Eagle would stir controversy over an ad for denim,” she said. 

 

“It signals that creating controversy and attention-grabbing content is now everywhere, and this flavor may reflect a cultural longing for simpler times. It is unlikely that [the team] proceeded with this campaign without having insight into their audience and business that led to the decision.”

 

Leila Fataar, former Adidas and Diageo marketer-turned-founder of consultancy Platform13 and author of Culture-Led Brands, believes the backlash reflects a simple truth: brand messages don’t land in a vacuum; they land in culture, and that culture needs to be reflected in agency teams and marketing departments.

 

“Brands are active participants in a global dialogue, with cultural fluency not just a marketing advantage but a foundational element of successful contemporary business strategy,” she said. 

 

Fataar added: “In this transformational and pivotal moment in global history, and specifically in the U.S., ensuring a variety of perspectives both in ideation and, importantly, in decision making is essential.”

 

Return of the Male Gaze

 

Intentional or not, American Eagle’s campaign is a trip back in time to the so-called “pre-woke” era that held fast to a stereotypical view of the ideal American woman: young, beautiful, buxom, and almost invariably caucasian. It was an industry norm that endured for decades.

 

In 1971, for example, National Airlines ran a hugely successful campaign that featured coquettish flight attendants inviting male viewers to “fly me.” 

 

In 1980, Calvin Klein pushed the envelope further with ads—which some have compared to American Eagle’s current effort—featuring a 15-year-old Brooke Shields pulling on skin-tight jeans and, in a sotto voice, addressing the camera: “Do you know what comes between me and my Calvins? Nothing.” 

 

A quarter of a century later, little had changed. GoDaddy’s ad for the 2005 Super Bowl featured voluptuous model Candice Michelle spilling out of a too-tight tank top, feigning embarrassment when her bra strap broke.

 

Though it’s aimed at women, American Eagle’s campaign echoes that aesthetic. Some of the ads focus on Sweeney’s individual body parts, including her chest and buttocks, and several of the spots show her performing for and addressing an unseen cameraman.

 

American Eagle’s is not the first sexually suggestive ad starring Sweeney this year. In June, she fronted a campaign for Dr. Squatch, promoting bars of soap that contained her bathwater. The push was firmly intended for the male gaze, with Sweeney mocking “dirty little boys” with a product that smelled like “morning wood.”

 

The actor was involved in everything from product development to creative strategy, Dr. Squatch’s vp of global marketing, John Ludeke told ADWEEK at the time.

 

“Women also love Sydney Sweeney,” he said. “While there may be some people who say they don’t like the concept, overall, what we’ve heard is people appreciate a woman who is in power, who’s in control, who’s able to have fun and not take themselves too seriously.”

 

American Eagle’s campaign was originally intended to support a domestic violence charity, with 100% of the purchase price of Sweeney’s namesake jeans going to Crisis Text Line, which provides confidential, 24/7 mental‑health and domestic violence support via text.

 

Instead, it has become another flashpoint in America’s culture wars.

 

It’s a clear reminder for brands that without the right checks and balances, even well-meaning work can do more harm than good.