Year in review: Biggest brand fails of 2024

Ahhh 2024. This year, brands pushed boundaries, embraced new tech, and worked harder than ever to capture the attention of an increasingly savvy audience. From AI-driven campaigns to diversity promises, the competition was fierce—but sadly, not every effort landed as intended.

Some campaigns dazzled, but others left us scratching our heads, sparking debates, or facing backlash that made headlines for all the wrong reasons. These moments serve as reminders that even the most well-resourced brands can falter when creativity clashes with execution.

Here’s Campaign’s look back at 2024’s biggest brand fails—the missteps that missed the mark and the lessons marketers can take into the new year, in no particular order.

1. Apple’s campaign controversies

Apple hit a stumbling block this year with two campaigns that failed to land as intended. The first, "The Underdogs: OOO (Out of Office)" was part of Apple’s “Apple at Work” series and featured a comedic storyline of a scrappy American team navigating their first overseas business trip in Thailand. The film, created by Apple’s in-house team, highlighted how the brand’s suite of products—Mac, iPhone, iPad, and Vision Pro—helped the team overcome challenges like translation, 3D design, and remote collaboration.

Despite its polished production and humorous tone, the ad drew criticism for its portrayal of Thailand as a backdrop for Western business antics, with viewers even saying it made the "the brand feel old." Some noted that the setting and local culture were reduced to clichés, with little integration into the storyline beyond being a convenient location. Critics accused Apple of perpetuating stereotypes, with some suggesting that the ad failed to authentically represent Thailand or engage with its vibrant culture.

Separately, Apple’s global “Crush” campaign for the iPad Pro sparked outrage for a different reason. The ad depicted traditional art tools being destroyed in an industrial crusher to highlight the tablet’s dominance as a creative tool. While intended to showcase innovation, it was criticised by artists and educators for undermining the coexistence of traditional and digital methods. Social media backlash saw hashtags like #RespectArt trending, as creatives rallied against the campaign’s dismissive tone. 

2. Uniqlo’s Xinjiang cotton crisis

Japanese fashion giant Uniqlo became embroiled in a controversy this year after a miscommunication about its cotton sourcing practices spiralled into a public relations issue. Originating from a BBC interview, the incident reignited long-standing debates over Xinjiang cotton, underscoring the high stakes of cross-cultural communication and the potential for mistranslations to disrupt international brands operating in China.

The controversy stemmed from a translation error during a televised interview with Tadashi Yanai, CEO of Fast Retailing, Uniqlo’s parent company. When asked whether the brand uses cotton from Xinjiang—a region linked to allegations of forced labour—Yanai’s response in Japanese was deliberately diplomatic: “We haven’t used Xinjiang cotton, yet.” The phrasing was cautious, reflecting an intent to remain non-committal on the politically charged issue. However, the BBC translated this as “does not use Xinjiang cotton,” framing it as a definitive rejection of the region’s cotton.

Chinese media quickly picked up on the mistranslation, with sensationalised headlines suggesting that Uniqlo had joined Western brands in boycotting Xinjiang cotton entirely. This narrative echoed earlier controversies that sparked widespread boycotts of brands like H&M. Social media amplified the story, with the hashtag “Uniqlo founder said not using cotton from Xinjiang” trending briefly on platforms like Weibo.

3. Google’s AI ad misfire

During the 2024 Paris Olympics, Google introduced its “Dear Sydney” ad, a heartstring-tugging tale of a young girl writing a fan letter to her idol, Olympic track star Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone. With a little help from Google’s Gemini AI chatbot, the child crafted a perfectly worded letter, showcasing how AI could help express thoughts and emotions.

But instead of a gold medal in creativity, the ad earned Google a digital roasting. Viewers weren’t charmed by the idea of outsourcing a heartfelt gesture to AI. Critics argued it turned a sweet, genuine act into something that felt cold and manufactured, sparking questions like, “What’s next? AI-generated hugs?” Social media exploded, with hashtags like #NotMyWords calling out the ethical implications of relying on technology for personal communication. Google, caught in the crossfire, issued a statement clarifying that Gemini AI was meant to complement human creativity, not replace it. While the brand tried to smooth things over, the ad became a cautionary tale about the fine line between showcasing innovation and preserving humanity in marketing—and a reminder that even the smartest tech can’t replace a little heart.

4. Mattel’s packaging debacle

Photo: Today Show USA

Mattel stumbled into a major PR nightmare this year when a simple oversight turned into a full-blown scandal. QR codes printed on several toys—intended to link to child-friendly content—ended up directing users to some errrr...very inappropriate websites. Cue horrified parents, outraged headlines, and a collective “How did this even happen?”

The backlash was swift and fierce. Consumer advocacy groups demanded answers, while parents questioned how a company so closely associated with childhood joy and safety could let such a glaring mistake slip through. Mattel scrambled to issue a recall, followed by a very public apology, promising to tighten up its quality control processes. But the damage was done, as the incident left parents side-eyeing a brand they had trusted for decades. For Mattel, it was a harsh lesson in the importance of precision—because when it comes to products for children, there’s simply no room for error. Let’s just say this was one QR code no one wanted to scan twice.

5. Bumble’s billboard bungle



Bumble’s cheeky billboard, boldly declaring “You know full well celibacy is not the answer,” was supposed to spark laughter and get singles swiping. Instead, it landed like a lead balloon, with critics accusing the dating app of being out of touch and downright dismissive of personal choices. What was meant to be a playful jab turned into an unintentional insult, trivialising decisions around relationships and sexuality.

Social media lit up with debates, with some users calling the tagline unnecessarily provocative, while others simply rolled their eyes at what felt like an overreach. The backlash wasn’t just a minor hiccup—it was a full-blown PR headache. Bumble, realising it had misread the room, quickly pulled the billboard and apologised, admitting that their attempt at humour missed the mark. This slip-up highlights the golden rule of edgy marketing: Know your audience. While sass and wit can be great tools for connecting with consumers, Bumble’s approach crossed into potential cringe territory. The whole fiasco left the brand with a valuable lesson—sometimes less is more, and sensitivity doesn’t have to mean boring.

6. Adidas’ SL 72 slip-up

Adidas tried to lace up some nostalgia with the re-release of its SL 72 sneakers, celebrating their debut at the 1972 Munich Olympics. But instead of stepping into a marketing win, the campaign stumbled into controversy when it launched on the anniversary of the Munich massacre—a tragic event where 11 Israeli athletes were killed.

The situation escalated with the choice of Bella Hadid as the face of the campaign. Known for her vocal support of Palestinian rights, Hadid’s involvement raised eyebrows, with critics questioning how anyone thought this pairing made sense. The backlash came fast, with both Adidas and Hadid taking heat for the lack of historical sensitivity. Hadid quickly issued a heartfelt apology, saying, “I am shocked, I am upset, and I am disappointed in the lack of sensitivity that went into this campaign.” She added, “Adidas should have known, and I should have done more research.” Adidas also apologised, describing the connection as “unintentional,” but by then, the damage was done.

What should have been a celebration of athletic heritage turned into a reminder that a little historical research goes a long way. For Adidas, this was a stumble that proved once again that timing isn’t just everything—it’s everything.

7. Nike’s paddle-licking PR problem

Nike’s Olympics campaign, “Winning Isn’t for Everyone,” narrated by the unmistakable Willem Dafoe and starring sports legends like Kylian Mbappé, Serena Williams, and LeBron James, was supposed to be a showstopper. Instead, it served up a marketing flop in China thanks to one baffling creative choice—a close-up shot of a Chinese table tennis player licking her paddle. Yes, licking.

Social media went into meltdown mode, with Weibo logging over 3,000 mentions—62% of them scathing. Critics didn’t hold back, calling the ad “cringe” and accusing Nike of peddling stereotypes.  While some defended the ad as an artistic choice, others questioned why anyone thought zooming in on paddle-licking would inspire anything but secondhand embarrassment. The backlash has left Nike scrambling for answers. The campaign became a classic example of creativity gone rogue. For a brand that prides itself on pushing boundaries, Nike was reminded that not every bold shot needs to make it off the storyboard. The moral of the story? If your campaign includes licking anything sports-related, just don’t.

8. Jaguar’s brand identity crisis

Let’s start with this: The jury’s still out on whether Jaguar’s 2024 rebranding is a total fail. With no solid evidence yet to prove it’s either a roaring success or a total misstep, we’re reserving the right to revisit this one. But for now, it’s parked here—and not in a VIP spot.

This year, Jaguar boldly traded its classic British charm for a sleek, futuristic luxury identity, aiming to woo a younger, trendier crowd. The move sounded great on paper but left long-time fans clutching their pearls (or, in this case, their walnut dashboards). Critics were quick to point out that the rebrand felt a little too generic, with many lamenting the loss of the distinctive, heritage-rich image that once made Jaguar stand out.

To make matters trickier, reports of declining sales in key markets have added to the unease. While Jaguar hasn’t confirmed whether the rebrand is to blame, the lack of enthusiasm from core audiences has raised some eyebrows. For now, this one sits in marketing limbo—perhaps a daring move that just needs time to resonate, or perhaps a swing and a miss. Either way, Jaguar’s lesson is clear: Balancing innovation with heritage isn’t easy, and if you lean too far into reinvention, you risk driving off with an empty passenger seat.