Pour decisions: When comparative ads fill the wrong cup

Pepsi’s Super Bowl ad pits its own product against Coca-Cola, in a cheeky campaign that shows a polar bear conducting a blind taste test. But is it a touchdown or a 10-yard-line fumble?

Ehrenberg-Bass Institute’s senior marketing scientist Cathy Nguyen ran a multi-market study to discover how well comparative ads work at evoking the correct brand in viewers’ minds.

Marketers adore a good showdown. Mac versus PC. Burger King nudging the golden arches. And back in the spotlight once again, Pepsi versus Coke. Comparative advertising is the industry’s version of a public battle  bold, theatrical and designed to get people talking. But while the creative drama plays out on screen, a quieter contest unfolds in people’s minds.

The trouble with sharing the stage

Pepsi’s high profile Super Bowl ad for 2026, directed by Oscar-winning filmmaker Taika Waititi, leans heavily on competitor references and cultural callbacks.

The polar bear is not just a cute animal. For some viewers, it is a well-rehearsed mental shortcut to Coca-Cola. Layer onto that additional cues such as taste test tropes that feature the competitor’s product, a classic rock soundtrack and a nod to a certain stadium concert moment that had the internet in a spin – a single ad becomes cluttered very quickly.

It makes for entertaining viewing, yes. But at what cognitive cost? It raises the question: how well do comparative ads work at evoking the correct brand in viewers’ minds?

Be a member to keep reading

Join Mumbrella Pro to access the Mumbrella archive and read our premium analysis of everything under the media and marketing umbrella.

Become a member

Get the latest media and marketing industry news (and views) direct to your inbox.

Sign up to the free Mumbrella newsletter now.

"*" indicates required fields

 

SUBSCRIBE

Sign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.