My problem with KFC's viral ad | Nudge Newsletter đź§ 


KFC or ZFC?

This KFC ad is much-praised online. Yet, I think it's misguided.

By promoting imitation fried chicken shops, I think KFC is doing something they might regret.

To explain, I need to share a study.

Titled: To be in Vogue, the researchers analyzed adverts from years in Vogue magazine for this study.

The researchers wanted to see if middle-brow fashion brands could raise their prices if they competed with high-end brands like Gucci.

In other words, is the Halo Effect so powerful that placing your ad next to Gucci’s could boost your status?

Their study concluded that yes, it does.

Simply placing a middle-brow brand’s ad next to a high-end one increased the perceived status of that brand and the willingness to pay.

I couldn't stop thinking about this study.

So, I decided to test it myself.

My experiment (which some may remember) was simple.

I contacted 100 Brits using Google Surveys.

I asked the group a simple question, “Would you listen to this podcast?”, and I included a picture of the Nudge logo.

However, I added a twist.

Half of the participants saw the Nudge logo on a blue background.

The other half saw the logo, but this time, you could see the faint, dimmed logos of other popular podcasts in the background.

My results matched the study's findings. Being pictured next to popular peers made Brits almost 3x more likely to listen.

Which brings me back to the KFC ad.

My problem with this ad is it's giving the imitation brands the halo effect benefits that my podcast received.

WFC, RFC, XFC and the rest will be seen as more credible by being associated with KFC.

If the study results hold, then customers should be more willing to try the imitation brands, which is surely not what KFC hoped.

All too often, ads that seem smart in the boardroom fail in the real world, and I reckon this might be one of them.

But what do you think? Reply and let me know.

Finally, big thanks to today’s sponsor, Planable.

Time for a social media tool you actually like

​Planable is the content collaboration platform that makes marketing teamwork a breeze. For real.

  • Create content for 9 social networks, your blog, newsletters, and campaign briefs — literally all your content.
  • It looks & feels like the native platforms, so it’s instantly familiar.
  • You can give and get straightforward feedback, right next to the post.
  • Plan months ahead with a super easy, visual calendar.
  • Set dedicated approval flows for each client or brand.
  • Schedule Posts, Stories, Reels, Carousels, TikToks, LinkedIn PDFs — you name it!

Plus AI-empowered creation, easy approvals, insightful analytics, and more. What’s not to love?

Cheers!

Phill

Nudge Newsletter

I spend 18 hours each week turning marketing psychology into readable newsletters.

Read more from Nudge Newsletter

The Country-of-Origin Effect Read online You’re thinking of buying a new pair of running shoes. Usually, you go with Nike. But this time, you’re considering Umbro (a lesser-known brand). Then you find out: Umbro makes their shoes in the UK. Nice. It's always good to find locally made brands. You’re willing to pay a decent price. But the next day, you hear Umbro are moving production to South Korea. Now, would you still pay the same? Probably not. That’s exactly what these researchers¹ found....

The Anchoring Effect Read online In the 1970s, Tversky and Kahneman¹ ran a simple experiment. They asked people: "What percentage of African countries are in the UN?" But before answering, participants had to spin a wheel with numbers from 0 to 100. The wheel was rigged to land on either 10 or 65. Then came the important question: "Is the actual percentage higher or lower than that number?" After that, participants gave their best estimate. Here’s what happened: People who saw 10 guessed 25%...

The Illusion of Choice Read online Give people $1 and two identical packs of gum. Same flavour. Same price. What happens? Most people aren't interested. That’s what Kim, Novemsky, and Dhar¹ found in a South Korean experiment. They gave participants ₩1,000 and two gum options, both priced at ₩630. Only 46% bought anything. But then they did something clever. They made the prices slightly different: ₩620 vs. ₩640. Now 77% decided to buy. Same gum. Slight price difference. Big impact. Why? When...