The New York Times’ coverage of Nike’s Kaepernick campaign made one thing obvious: this wasn’t a safe move dressed up as bold creativity. It was actually bold. Nike didn’t tiptoe into controversy – they walked straight into it wearing their strongest brand identity like armor.
What stood out was how intentional it all felt. Nike understands its audience better than most brands understand their org charts. They knew who would celebrate the ad, who would be furious, and who would buy two more pairs of sneakers just to make a point. That doesn’t make the decision easy, but it explains why it resonated.
The campaign also reminded marketers that “purpose” isn’t a costume you put on for awards season. It requires consistency, conviction, and a tolerance for turbulence. Nike had all three.
If taking a stand is risky, is avoiding one even riskier? And how many brands talk about authenticity without ever doing anything that tests it?
Related article: NY Times
