Should Brands Go Negative on Rivals in Advertising?

A university study finds that while most marketing advice warns against negative messaging about competitors, teasing “genuine rivals” can increase consumer engagement significantly, especially among loyal customers.

In the study, the researchers identified a “rivalry reference effect,” or how brands referencing a “true rival” in public messages can boost consumer engagement and purchasing intent — as long as the rivalry references are built around a strong narrative.

The researchers wrote in a Harvard Business Review article, “Stories are inherently engaging; they’re easy to follow, entertaining, and emotionally compelling. When brands tap into existing rivalry narratives, they’re essentially borrowing the engagement power of storytelling.”

The most-referenced example of such rival-attack ads is the “Pepsi Challenge,” which was first introduced in 1975 and features blind taste tests of Pepsi versus an unnamed red can known only as “the other brand.” Other examples of legit rival narratives cited in the study included Samsung/Apple, T-Mobile/Verizon, and Burger King/McDonald’s.

Leveraging Rivalry To Build a Narrative Can Work, But Also Holds Potential Consequences for Brands

Beyond identifying “true rivals,” the researchers’ advice on leveraging rivalry in marketing included building narrative continuity, tailoring messages to audience segments (including fans of the rival brand), and not taking the negativity too far.

The researchers wrote in the HBR article, “Think sarcasm and humorous jabs over ill-will and vitriol. The shared history between rivals creates a context where ‘all’s fair in love and war’ applies, mitigating the typical downsides of negative messaging.”

Other examples of rivals referencing each other in ads or on social media at times include Pizza Hut/Domino’s, Adidas/Nike, Chevrolet/Ford, Popeye’s/Chick-fil-A, Apple/Microsoft, and Doritos/Pringles.

The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted how brands are increasingly borrowing from social media tactics and taking direct shots at competitors in a bid to stand out, citing Vrbo’s recent ads calling out Airbnb — and prebiotic soda brands Poppi and Olipop trading blow on social media. The WSJ’s report stated, “Comparison advertising is getting more confrontational as brands work harder to catch consumers’ attention, while the general tone of social media lowers the barrier to trading insults.”

On the other hand, Pinar Yildirim — professor of marketing and economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and co-author of a 2022 report on the effects of negative campaigns — told the WSJ that “negative advertising wars reduce demand for all involved parties.”

Her report detailed the back-and-forth attacks between Ragu and Prego in the late 1990s that devalued the entire product category.

In a Campaign article exploring whether referencing a competitor is a “sign of weakness,” several marketers indicated it depends on execution.

Anna Arnell — creative partner with And Rising — told Campaign, “It’s not always a sign of weakness and can even make brands seem more confident. Especially if it’s two well-known brands when the category is broadly divided into one or the other.”

Nicky Bullard — chairwoman and chief creative officer, MRM McCann — added, “Done well, it will be described as audacious (think Burger King’s ‘Whopper detour’ and ‘Burn that ad’)… However, done badly and it can look cheap, lazy and/or desperate.”