Being provocative for the sake of it has had its day. It’s sad and attention seeking. It's desperate and ultimately doesn’t resonate with today’s audience so why do we still see so many “look, look at me dad” campaigns go live and fail immediately. Is it weak insight, bad strategy, poor creative, maybe bad media choices or possibly all of the above?

It’s tough for a challenger brand to stay true to their roots as they grow and become more mainstream. Some embrace the change and move away from the angst-ridden teenage years others like BrewDog refuse to grow up. The aging rocker who refuses to change. And to their credit sometimes it works but when it comes to Punk AF I think they are wide of the mark. BrewDog built their brand on being subversive and through anti advertising. It worked. This campaign though is attention seeking in the worst possible way.

The campaign is currently being investigated by the ASA in the UK. It’s not their first run in either. Back in 2013 following a different investigation by the ASA in relation to this statement on their website

"BrewDog is a post Punk apocalyptic mother fu*ker of a craft brewery. Say goodbye to the corporate beer whores crazy for power and world domination ... Ride toward anarchy and caramel craziness. Let the sharp bitter finish rip you straight to the tits. Save up for a Luger, and drill the bastards."

BrewDog proclaimed “those ASA motherf*ckers have no jurisdiction over us” but ultimately removed the copy over fears it would adversely affect their ‘Equity for Punks’ scheme. Was the first sign that they weren’t absolute punks and that maybe profits mattered a little more?

Back to today. What is the strategy here with the new Punk AF campaign? It has left me confused. Are they trying to say you can still be a badass and drink non-alcoholic beer? Ok, boomer, it’s 2019 no one thinks like that these days. And by quasi swearing is that meant to make the brand seem edgy? It doesn’t. It’s your uncle who swears at Christmas dinner and just makes everyone feel awkward. The same uncle who could probably do with sticking to AF for the rest of dinner as he desperately clings to the partying of his youth.

Then once you get past the creative strategy you get hit with the media strategy and planning.

Great. Sweary boomer uncle is now outside the school. It’s bad planning for a start but where’s the common sense? Unless of course that is the strategy. They want to get banned. They want to upset people. That is a credible strategy but for that to work you need to have the people on your side and the for the ‘fun police’ to put a stop to it much to everyone else’s disappointment. That’s not the case here. That works for Paddy Power because it understands its audience and isn’t trying to be overtly cool. I always feel with Paddy Power we are all in on the joke and it’s poking fun in non-harmful way. And, yes, sometimes it gets it wrong too but in general I think the tone is bang on.

Having worked on one of the most successful NA beer launches over the last few years with Heineken 0.0 we have seen the potential for the category and with the right tone and activation just how powerful the brand messaging can be. For me, the Heineken 0.0 campaign speaks to people on modern terms in relation to alcohol consumption and encourages people to enter a conversation about NA beer in an enjoyable manner. We have seen that a lot through the experiential campaigns where 1-to-1 interactions are the focus for education and sampling.

What do you think? Anyone out there want to fight sweary uncle’s corner?

- JD