Solana’s Latest Advert Was a Masterclass in Controversy Marketing | by Ben Fairbank | The Capital | Mar, 2025
Crypto marketing is a 3 ringed-circus at the best of times, capturing attention amidst the cacophony of competing narratives is a formidable challenge. Cutting through the noise is damn near impossible. Solana’s recent advertisement saga serves as a compelling case study in what can be termed “controversy marketing”, a strategy where brands deliberately court controversy to amplify their visibility. Hear me out, it’s not an easy one to swallow.
On March 17, 2025, Solana released an advertisement titled “America is Back, Time to Accelerate,” intended to promote its upcoming Solana Accelerate conference. The ad featured a character named “America” undergoing therapy for “rational thinking syndrome,” expressing a desire to “invent technologies, not genders.” This portrayal was widely criticised for trivialising gender identity issues, leading to accusations of the ad being “offensive,” “cringe,” and “divisive.” You can see the ad here
The backlash was swift and intense. Prominent figures within the crypto community, such as Adam Cochran of Cinneamhain Ventures, questioned the judgment behind the ad’s creation, highlighting a disconnect within certain tech industry circles. In response to the mounting criticism, Solana removed the ad approximately nine hours after its release. However, by that time, the video had already amassed over 1.2 million views, with snippets continuing to circulate online.
The timing of this controversial ad is noteworthy. With an impending bull run and heightened competition among blockchain platforms like Base and Avalanche (Avax) to onboard new users, Solana’s bold move can be seen as an attempt to reclaim the spotlight. In a market saturated with similar narratives, generating controversy can be an effective strategy to differentiate oneself and reignite public interest.
Solana’s decision to pull the ad may have inadvertently amplified its reach, a phenomenon known as the “Streisand Effect,” where attempts to suppress information only increase public interest. The ad’s removal spurred a frenzy among internet users eager to locate and share the banned content, thereby extending its lifespan and audience beyond initial expectations. This tactic mirrors instances where leaked or controversial materials gain traction precisely because of efforts to conceal them.
In the crypto trading sphere, profitability often supersedes ethical considerations. As I’ve said many times before, “I’d trade a dog sh&t coin if it was going to make money.” This sentiment suggests that, despite the controversy, Solana’s token traders are primarily concerned with potential gains rather than the platform’s marketing missteps. Consequently, the ad’s backlash is unlikely to deter traders focused on financial returns.
Quantifying the exact value of the media attention garnered by Solana’s ad is challenging. However, considering that the ad reached over 1.2 million views before its removal, the exposure is substantial. In traditional advertising terms, achieving such reach organically would require a significant investment. Therefore, the controversy, despite its negative connotations, effectively functioned as a cost-efficient publicity mechanism, keeping Solana at the forefront of industry discussions.
This ad could only be labeled as poorly executed, with subpar acting, a weak storyline, and an excessive duration that failed to maintain viewer engagement. Given Solana’s resources and the multiple layers of approval typically involved in such campaigns, it’s plausible to consider that the ad’s contentious nature was intentional, a calculated risk to generate buzz. This strategy aligns with tactics observed in the crypto industry, where sensationalism often drives attention. For instance, there have been instances where project founders have feigned death during NFT launches to manipulate market dynamics, only to resurface once sales targets were met. Medium
Solana’s recent advertising endeavor underscores the potential and peril of controversy marketing. While the ad succeeded in capturing attention and sparking widespread discussion, it also risked alienating segments of the community and attracting negative press. In an industry where visibility can translate to financial gain, such bold strategies may become more commonplace. However, brands must carefully weigh the benefits against potential reputational damage, ensuring that the pursuit of attention does not compromise core values or stakeholder trust.
Ultimately, Solana’s self-cancellation serves as a reminder that in the digital age, the line between notoriety and infamy is perilously thin, and the true measure of success lies in navigating this divide with strategic acumen. Price is the only true judge of success in a token world and the jury is out.
