[00:00:00] Mia Fileman
Are you tired of empty promises and stolen ideas? Me too. Got. Marketing is a podcast for marketers and small brands who want real talk and clever strategies without the bs. Running an online business is hard, but everything gets easier when your marketing starts performing. I am Mia FileMan, your straight shooting campaign loving friend here to talk marketing, running a business, pop culture, and everything in between.
Let's dive in.
Hello, friend. I am back today with another episode with Lillie Brown, campaign Del Mars Community Manager, where we are going to be unpacking the Sydney Sweeney American Eagle campaign controversy. This needed to be a podcast episode because there are so many layers [00:01:00] to this campaign and so many different perspectives, and we just, we needed this space to flesh it out so.
Thanks for joining me for this chat, li.
Lillie Brown
My pleasure. I am an opinionated gal. You know this and I've got lots of opinions on this campaign, so let's start unpacking it.
Mia
All right, cool. Do you wanna do a bit of a summary just in case anyone's living under a rock and they haven't seen it?
Lillie
Yes, of course. So Sydney Sweeney has partnered with. Denim brand, American Eagle, and they've released this new campaign where a lot of the visuals feature Sydney Sweeney lying on the floor, seductively zipping up her jeans, and in a very breathy vocal fry voice that is. Almost incredibly difficult to understand what she's actually saying to saying in the hero film, genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color. The camera cuts to her face. And then there's a voiceover [00:02:00] from the narrator which says Sydney's Sweeney has great genes. And there's another cut in another one of the videos where the camera really quite intensely zooms in on her cleavage, and she says. My body's composition is determined by my jeans, so she's appearing wearing in one of them the full Canadian tuxedo.
Lots of cuts of her laying on the ground, pulling up her jeans, or bent over the Ford Mustang, and it's all incredibly hypersexualized. And so this campaign has come out. A lot of people have taken issue with the genes rhetoric, G-E-N-E-S, and so they're. Bringing up the fact that there are parallels to eugenics theory in this, and so that's what we wanted to unpack today.
Where did the messaging go wrong? Why has this campaign attracted so much controversy? Because it's gotten so much airtime across all forms of [00:03:00] media in the last week.
Mia
Do you wanna just explain for a minute what eugenics is if people aren't familiar with that term?
Lillie
Yeah, eugenics theory is. A theory that says if we eradicated less desirable traits from the population, then we would have a more pure race.
So think about back to Nazi Germany and Hitler with his Aryan race, blonde hair, blue-eyed. Generally quite tall and slim. That was his perfect race. So eugenics is this idea that if we reduce and essentially breed out these undesirable traits, we'll be left with a more desirable population, which is.
Absolutely horrific, obviously. Mia, what's your take on it? What was your first impression when you saw the campaign?
Mia
Look, it didn't offend me, but I'm not the point here. Uh, I just looked at it and thought, oh wow, that's pretty lazy. Jeans and jeans. Wow. Very lazy pun. It's [00:04:00] giving first idea, not a genius brand platform.
Then I looked closer, and I actually think the controversy is deliberate. It skirts the line just enough for plausible deniability, but it's provocative enough to get everyone talking, which let's be honest, is more attention than American Eagle has had in years. It feels to me like a really calculated play against.
This expectation that all brands should take a stand on identity and inclusion, and in a time where most campaigns are hyper aware, hyper curated for a diverse representation. This one is really disruptive because it is not diverse. And I'm not celebrating that by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think it's intentional.
They're tapping into nostalgia with the Brooke Shields, Calvin Klein campaign and catering to a very specific appeal that is gaining traction in this second Trump era. Whether this campaign lands or not, it's a [00:05:00] reminder that not every brand is trying to be progressive. Some are just trying to be really loud.
Lillie
Mm, and loud. They have been through this campaign and to me, when I first saw it, not gonna lie, I was like, what in the white supremacist fantasy is this? It is so lazy, and I agree with you that it does seem manufactured. It does seem like manufactured controversy. They knew the line, they were skirting and they've run with it anyway because.
Perhaps this is the sort of reaction and response that they wanted, and so there's a couple of issues with it. First, I do think that there are racial undertones in it. That came through to me the first time that I watched that hero campaign film where she's. Doing the Genes monologue. The second thing is that it is really overtly sexualized.
That's not always a bad thing, but the fact that it was an homage to that Calvin Klein Brooke Shields campaign from the eighties, let's talk about that for a second. Brooke Shields was [00:06:00] 15 at the time of filming that, and she has since come out. The publicity that she received around that campaign was actually really damaging for her, and so when that campaign came out in the eighties, there was backlash against.
Status well of, oh, well, isn't this bordering on child pornography? She was essentially insinuating that she wasn't wearing underwear underneath her robe as she shimmied up her jeans laying on the floor. Again, the breathy tone of voice and so. Brooke has come out in a 2023 documentary Pretty Baby, and said that this was actually really damaging to her development as she was growing up.
And she was so young at the time that she didn't actually understand the innuendos in the campaign. And so when you watch that Brooke Shields campaign video and the Sydney Sweeney Hero one, it's not even an homage in my eyes. It's almost a total ripoff. And it's pretty crazy to me that they've essentially recreated.
This campaign from the 1980s with a modern [00:07:00] lens, and they've kind of thought, Hmm, yeah, this is gonna be received. Well, this is gonna land with the audience, and it obviously hasn't. And so another thing that is coming to me is who is the target market for this Sydney Sweeney ad campaign? Presumably it's women.
She's wearing denim designed for women, and this new range that she's collaborated with American Eagle on is allegedly to raise awareness and money for a domestic violence charity, which is so crazy to me because we haven't seen any of that come through in the campaign scripts, in the social media post.
Nothing. It almost seems like they've kept that in their back pocket for this very reason. When the controversy bubbles up, when they start getting called out, they're like, oh, we've got this little Trump card in my back pocket. That pun was intentional and we're going to use that, but we haven't actually been talking about it in any of the marketing push since this campaign was launched.
And it's also a little insane that, okay, sure. They're allegedly raising money for [00:08:00] a DV charity and raising awareness about dv. But we're looking at Hypersexualized creative and it's like, is that really the right message to be sending when we're talking about the incredibly complex and important issue of domestic violence, reducing it to essentially tits and ass to raise awareness for domestic violence.
That's how it reads to me.
Mia
But I disagree that it's a failure for the brand in terms of commercial, because yes. Mm-hmm. There are quite a few. Commentators who are appalled, who are calling it racist, were those people going to ever purchase American Eagle jeans? There are an equal number, if not louder number of commentators saying that we've lost our collective minds that if we think that this is offensive, then we've gone too far.
And one of those commentators is Mark Zen. And I just wanna read. Out to you what he said. It's an average ad for a fading brand [00:09:00] featuring hot celebrities. Others may choose to see all kinds of insidious extra motives. Theirs is an authentic interpretation like everyone else's, but this is the reader's perception, not the author's intent.
Surely sanity will prevail. He wrote Prevail. Nothing in this ad runs against American Eagle's. Brand positioning. The crisis about to emerge is coming from external narratives. Not internal errors and the relatively minor status of the American Eagle brand for most current fashion buyers means that whatever the company loses in sales from a few super radical trendies, it will surely win a hundred fold back from consumers who don't care, don't see any of the nonsense, but it were who are suddenly aware and readily salient for a brand they never thought of before.
So this is a really interesting take where we're having a conversation about, is this right? Is this moral? Is this ethical? Which it's [00:10:00] not. Is this commercial And often these two things are really running in congruent and people don't love when I have this conversation, but you are the one that said to me two things can be true at once.
And it's so true that this I think is going to be a commercial success for the brand because they know who they are for and they know who they are not for. And there are a lot of people who have felt quite ashamed of. Themselves in this kind of era that we are living in, that like, oh, because I am white, that somehow means that there's something wrong with me.
They're upset about that, and this kind of campaign is allowing them to feel good about themselves again. So I think that that's where it's coming down for me is that while I would never feel right about upsetting people and hurting people's. Feelings, the fact that this is going to be a disaster for the brand.
I disagree.
Lillie
Mm. Before we started recording this, I said to [00:11:00] you that up until mid last week, I was like, really? Could the brand be this tone deaf? But now as I shared at the beginning, it does seem like this was a calculated campaign strategy that they decided to take. They're really leaning into the controversy here, especially after they released a statement on Friday that says, essentially we stand by it.
And I think that's also ignoring. The undertones here, so yes, absolutely it is getting attention. That's what they wanted. I do believe as a brand, since they released that statement, they've kind of dug their heels in, they've reduced their posting frequency on Instagram, which is very unusual for the brand, and it almost seems like, yeah, they are digging their heels in and really embracing this point of view controversy.
For controversy's sake, I am sure that someone on their PR team is running that line of. All press is good press. And so riding this wave of controversy seems like an intentional [00:12:00] choice that they've taken as a brand at this point, knowing that in the attention economy, outrage has become its own form of currency, particularly social currency, and they're really riding this wave, especially coupled with the silence after releasing.
This statement indicates that this was a really calculated move, so maybe. The campaign landed exactly as American Eagle hoped it would. But in saying that, I think we can acknowledge that it is, you know, having some type of commercial success for the brand. I'm sure their search trends are up. Their stock prices have increased marginally in the last week since this campaign went live.
But I think it's also ignoring the fact that. How damaging these types of campaigns can be. This type of content can be because campaigns and brands don't exist in a vacuum with the current cultural and political climate across the world. Still, particularly in the United States, it comes off as really tone deaf for me, a really tone [00:13:00] deaf execution because the Trump administration is actively seeking to eliminate DEI initiative.
They're aggressively detaining immigrants on mass, and it was just last October that Donald Trump was identifying bad genes as a cause of invented or real crime committed by immigrants. And so where a lot of my concerns lie is. Okay with the demographic of people with whom this campaign has landed and they're like, hell yeah.
Is that going to be seen as almost a form of social permission for them to dig their heels in and keep perpetuating white supremacist racist rhetoric now, especially that we've got this really popular celebrity almost as the face. Of that demographic related to this campaign.
Mia
I agree completely. It's very divisive, but this group that they're reenergizing is bigger than we think.
You know, this idea of [00:14:00] pride in being American, pride in being white, not made to feel ashamed for being a man, not made to feel ashamed for being a man attracted to attractive women. All of these things, it's, it's actually weirdly and disturbingly a very uplifting message for a particular audience group.
Now, what this does to us as a society, not good, not good things, right? Because like you said, campaigns. Don't exist in a vacuum. The more of this content that exists, the more we're going to see racist rhetoric.
Marketing circle Ad
Does your marketing feel like guesswork? Be honest. Join Marketing Circle the membership for female entrepreneurs who wanna nail their strategy.
Their creativity and create marketing that actually pays off no cookie cutter templates and broken dreams, just practical marketing, training, mentoring and support To help you grow your business, [00:15:00] you'll work directly with me, a legit marketing expert, and tap into a brains trust of clever business owners who bring their expertise, ideas, and support to the table.
We are capped at 45 members, so apply to join today.
Mia
What has been really fascinating to me about this campaign is how strongly opinionated people have been on either side.
Lillie
Yeah, it has seemed like there's no real middle ground. People are either huge advocates for it. They don't see a problem with it.They love the concept. And on the other camp. We've got people like me who think this is incredibly eugenics coded, a white supremacist fantasy, and completely tone deaf in the current cultural and political climate. And I've also heard a lot of people saying on that side of pro this campaign, they've said, oh, this is just a genes ad.
Don't read too far into it. And personally, I think that's an incredibly reductive point of view. As [00:16:00] we've said before, campaigns and brands, they are part of the cultural lexicon. And so this also plays into stereotypes of fashion being frivolous. And this is just about jeans, when it's actually not, there's nothing more intimately acquainted with our identity than how we clothe our bodies and to say.
It's just an ad for jeans, ignores all of the cultural, political, racial, and gender dynamics that inform how we dress and how we feel about our bodies. And it is really lazy writing as well. It wasn't funny, it wasn't clever, it was a bad pun, like you said. Seemed like the first half baked idea they could have come up with.
They're also saying that. This is about her story, Sydney's story. I don't know about you, but in any of these campaign materials, I have not seen any story. There is no story to this campaign whatsoever than thinly veiled racial undertones for me. [00:17:00] And it's like, what are you actually trying to say here?
And if the brand is trying to target probably women, why are they using such overtly hypersexualized images of another woman to sell that product? It just. Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me from a marketing lens. Right. It seems like just so lazy, but also, is that intentional? Is that part of this calculated line that they're intentionally skirting of being incredibly provocative and almost inflammatory?
Without ever overtly coming out and revealing where their affiliations lie.
Mia
Sure. I think that, you know, she's aspirational. Like I would love to look like Sydney Sweeney does in the jeans. And so this is why we've always, you know, in the past, cast very beautiful women in fashion campaigns and some women, you know, they want to be viewed as sexy and you know, if these genes are gonna help them get there, then great.
I'd like to [00:18:00] read to you a couple of the responses that we received. So I put a call out in the weekly roundup last week to get people to weigh in on this debate. And there's two responses that I'd love to read out. I'm not gonna name names just 'cause I don't have permission, but I'm just gonna read out their responses.
Um, Mia as a brown person, I've been exposed to countless more subtle forms of racism in advertising that I find this ad not in the least offensive. I'm more offended by the lame, lazy tagline. Sydney Sweeney is objectively young and attractive. If I was to use the Gen Z phrase, she was born with a face card that doesn't decline.
She legitimately does have good gym. I think maybe this was an ad campaign that should have been on mute. Billboard only sexy doesn't need a voiceover to tell me that it's sexy. The video of her reading script was positively cringe-worthy. Another interesting conversation I had with someone else was [00:19:00] companies using an almost performative level of inclusivity in their ads when it doesn't make sense for their audience.
Sometimes until the point that it alienates their customer base and confuses the message about who this brand is actually supposed to be for.
Lillie
Yeah. I think that is a really nuanced take and a great part of this conversation in that this campaign has attracted so much controversy. Should it have attracted this much?
Quite frankly, I don't think so because it is just so shit. I completely agree with that sentiment that it should have been Billboard only if it had to exist at all, because that breathy vocal fry monologue did nothing for the campaign. I mean, even the writing of that where she says jeans are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color and even eye color, genetics determine eye color.
There's no often about it. Like that's a pretty bloody sure thing. And [00:20:00] so the writing in it is, yeah, super lazy and almost infantilizing, particularly coupled with the tone of voice and delivery of that monologue. I thought. I think looking at the parallels to eugenics theory and this campaign yet, it might seem like a stretch, but again, we're not looking at this campaign in isolation.
We're looking at it against the backdrop of the current global. Political and cultural climate. And the cultural climate in the US which has been getting progressively more terrifying for immigrants and people of color, trans and gender diverse people as. This administration has gone along. And so I think to say that it's just denim, it's just an ad, again, is super reductive because we're not looking at the whole picture and what's happening in the cultural climate around it.And I think that is why this campaign has felt so off for so many people because. We are living through active genocides and the [00:21:00] persecution of people within their own countries and lands on a really large scale.
Mia
Yeah. One commentator, Janine Jacob, who has been reporting on this campaign quite a bit on social media.
I'm gonna link her account in the show. Made a really good point Li that the people who created this campaign, they are trained in visual language, right? They knew what they were doing. So the fact that this is just an accident and that it has been misinterpreted as eugenics theory is very kind of dismissive.
Of the kind of agency power that works behind a brand like American Eagle, like they study this in university or college In terms of exactly how this is going to be interpreted, for sure.
lillie
I couldn't agree more. Like it is completely deliberate and if you think about the budget that would've been behind this campaign, this isn't something that's been quickly [00:22:00] cobbled together by interns.
There have been layers of approval from various creative teams and the executive leadership, and yet it has still come to fruition. Interestingly, I came across an interview in Women's Wear Daily where American Eagle's Chief Marketing Officer described the campaign in his words as potentially one of the biggest gets in American Eagle history.
Presumably having Sydney Sweeney as. The face of the campaign and he goes on to say, Sydney Sweeney is the IT girl of the moment, and she is helping us create the IT jeans campaign of the season. Sydney really encapsulates the American Eagle. She's the girl who can play the red carpet, but she's. Also the girl next door.
And so in this current political climate in the US, we are seeing this return to conservatism, right? We've seen all of the trad wife content in the last 18 months. I know you and I have spoken about that at length, and that again does not happen in isolation. This is [00:23:00] calculated and it is incredibly relevant to what's happening culturally and politically because that does inform how we feel the, the types of media that we are creating, and importantly how we respond to media.
So what you said earlier about, okay, this controversy and having this campaign labeled as eugenics coded probably wasn't what American Apparel had in mind. I think to some degree it was. But to be explicitly eugen is coded. I don't think that was their intention at all. But then we need to weigh up intention versus impact.
And throughout this, American Eagle hasn't really given any airtime to people's, I think incredibly valid concerns about what they're seeing in this campaign. And rather than letting their audience know that they hear them, they're taking the feedback on, they're actually ignoring a really large proportion of their target market and how they feel about their campaign.
And as a consumer, this shows the brand has a quite a large indifference to their consumer, which I'm [00:24:00] not sure how much commercial sense that makes, whether they're. Intentionally trying to alienate that portion of their target market when really they could have a bigger piece of the pie if they didn't do a campaign like this.
Mia
I don't know. I don't know if it does represent a large portion of their target audience. You know, my algorithm is so different to my husband's, right? Like what is, you know, a storm in a teacup for me is just, he's not even on his radar. Do you know what I mean? So like I, you know, I live and breathe campaigns I love.
Discussing them. So of course I was served 20 videos in 24 hours. My husband has no idea that this is going on. And so it really, for American Eagle, are we talking about some really loud outliers or are we talking about the overwhelming majority of people are disgusted by this campaign and it really comes, comes down to that.
Are they gonna lose more than they gain? And I don't think that they will, which is sad, right. It's sad that, that [00:25:00] this is probably going to be a commercial success for them. What it annoys me the most is that this was a huge missed opportunity to do something really cool and really creative and really smart with Sydney Sweeney.
Like if you're gonna pay someone millions of dollars to be in your campaign, this is what you decided to do. Come on to me.
lillie
Yeah. Culturally and morally, this campaign is a flop. Remains to be seen on the commercial success element of it. I also think about why haven't they beta tested any of this? Was there focus groups that happened and the campaign went ahead Anyway, it seems like there's been a very strong reaction to this ad amongst buyers and non-bias.
Maybe if they had tested that they wouldn't have gotten this level of controversy. But again, I do think that this controversy was calculated. They did want it regardless of the cost, which is selling out on your morals, I guess.
Mia
Yeah. Alright. Here's the second email I [00:26:00] received. I just wanna caveat and say that these are not my thoughts.
Is an email that I received and I'm reading it verbatim.
Hey Mia, great campaign. These people are giving them what they want, publicity. And in a moderately post woke era, their canceling no longer has the impact. I was just in the US and speaking with your average working class people who just wanna leave peacefully and get along, people are sick of being called racist.
This is a Twitter storm that your average person couldn't give a shit about except that they are sick of being divided by complainers, not American Eagle. What I heard most about it, it feels like a nineties campaign, and thank God for that. People are sick of everything being virtue signaling performance versus genuinely clever.
Compare this to the Jaguar ad that lost them bulk stock. It's clever, cheeky, and fun. Reminds me of Sicken Rex [00:27:00] for 1989. That's my opinion. Don't hate me. Now. What's your bloody opinion?
Lillie
A very divisive and polarizing campaign
Mia
indeed. Alright, I just wanna wrap up by saying something to kind of round this out that is really clear to me with this campaign that as brands we no longer own the narrative, our audiences do.
So while you can carefully or not so carefully, script the story you want to tell, the public will ultimately remix, reframe, and reinterpret it through their cultural lens. And it is our responsibility as brands to understand this and to think about all the different ways in which our marketing and our campaigns are going to be interpreted.
Lillie
I couldn't agree more with that sentiment because we've seen the difference between intent versus impact in this campaign and many other campaigns that have come before them. And I think it is our [00:28:00] responsibility as business and brand owners who are running our own marketing or having staff run our marketing for us, that we do it in a way that is aligned with our values and that isn't oppressive.
And that's the thing that really got me hooked on this campaign is. That they're leaning into dynamics and rhetoric that is intentionally polarizing, but it's also oppressive. Eugenics was inherently oppressive. It was devastating, and we still have the cultural hangover from this experience, and for me, it is completely morally bankrupt for American Eagle to have taken this angle.
Really just letting those racial undertones. Bubble underneath the surface, like you said at the beginning, while still maintaining their plausible deniability. As they said in the statement, they released this always was and always will be about great genes. And it's like it's not, but they're telling us something different.
Mia
Yeah, this is a really. Perfect [00:29:00] example of a brand who's selling out, right? Who's putting profit above purpose. It's like we all have to make that decision about whether sometimes we choose money or choose the right thing to do, and American Eagle have told us. What their choice is and like, I get it, they're a faceless corporation and they have shareholders and they're fading into irrelevance like many other brands.
And this seems like a desperate last attempt. And it, it just comes down to each of us to decide whether we are willing to compromise and perpetuating quite damaging content in order to make Bank and American Eagle have made that deal with the devil.
Lillie
Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. And I think this is a really great example of making the deal with the devil and the implications of that because I think in 10, 15 years, this campaign is probably gonna be used as a case study in marketing and business courses, hopefully about what not to do because it is inherently alienating, and I do think it's oppressive.
And as brands, [00:30:00] is that really what we're trying to create in the world? Does that align with our morals and our ethics in this case? Absolutely not. But the irony isn't lost to me that that faceless corporation of American Eagle is run by middle-aged white men who have been doing this sort of work for ages.
They are thinking, all right, commercial profitability, what is going to get us the most attention, the most clicks and hello within our attention economy, we. Seen how effective rage bait content can be to get people to get up in arms, and they unfortunately have really leaned into it with this campaign they have.
Mia
Thank you so much for your time. Again, Lily. We will see this play out before us. Find out if it is a commercial success and what happens next with this quite controversial campaign
Segment:
making waves.
Lillie
Alright. Tourism Australia has just released their newest campaign, come and say Good day. Have you had a chance to look at it?
Mia
No, not yet. Hot off the press.
Lillie
Hot Off the [00:31:00] press just launched today. I am feeling incredibly chuffed with myself for being so on it and with it, it features our favorite Australian. Spokesperson, Mr. Robert Irwin? No. After the campaign success of the Bonds campaign, he is back as the face of Australia and there couldn't be a better choice, I think, especially for this campaign.
Mia
So good. And what do you think of the campaign film?
lillie
I really like it. So they've brought together a lot of talents. We've got Robert Irwin, of course. We've also got cameos from Nella Lawson. Love Nella. I know it's. Such a treat. And so this campaign is targeting specific markets. So the key markets that they identified as wanting to increase tourism to Australia from is China, India, the us, uk, um, Japan, Germany, and South Korea.
So they're getting a lot of this. Campaign content and they've chosen talent, [00:32:00] uh, that speaks to that as well. So for example, in the localized advertisements that they're creating, Indian influencer Sarah Duka and Chinese actor and TV host, Yosh Yu, the spokespeople for it as well in collaboration with Robert Irwin.
So I think that's a really smart move to onboard local talent. And in the campaign film that local talent is essentially coming back from their great Australian holiday. Gushing about how incredible it was that it was like another world. All these really incredible experiences that they had while on this holiday, they've also included lots of homages to previous Tourism Australia campaigns like Lara Bingo's iconic campaign of where the bloody hell are you.
Toss it and throw another shrimp on the barbie. There's no marsh to that where uh, someone turns to brown says, mate, we call them prawns here to kind of take the piss out of that original campaign if no one in Australia calls them shrimp. And so it's lots of beautiful [00:33:00] scenic shots. Serve our landscape and the types of things that you can do here, like snorkeling in the Great Barrier Reef, and there's also a mascot, a tiny little kangaroo that's animated.
That was probably my least favorite part of the campaign. It was super cute. It was fun. I just felt like it. Cheapened it a little bit. Ruby, the souvenir. Kangaroo. No shade to you. All right. Maybe that will work. It's just not my personal preference, but this campaign is really geared at increasing tourism from.
People who are living in countries other than Australia. So this is not about domestic tourism, it's really about targeting international travelers and getting them and enticing them to come to Australia. We see Robert Owen driving across the sand dunes in a big, beautiful land cruiser. Lots of gday mates and all those.
Euphemisms that we use, and I think this is gonna be a really interesting campaign. The typography also I loved, I thought that was really [00:34:00] great. And it's also super fun. It really, I think, aligns with the Australian ideology that we don't take ourselves too seriously. We're able to have a laugh and poke fun at each other without it being nasty.
And that I think, comes through really nice. In this campaign. Oh, that is such a great summary. Thank you so much. I'm gonna go check it out right now and I'll report back. Thank you. It sounds fantastic. It's a good one. I liked it and I think as well, really timely and so nice to see this campaign so well executed when.
Australia has such incredible things on offer, both if you live here or if you're a tourist, and I think it really highlights the best of what we've got and the casting of Nella and Robert Irwin and all the other talent that they've got in there really hit the mark. So we'll see how it goes.
Mia
Thank you so much, Lil My pleasure.
I've started a Substack as the ideal companion to the podcast. It's packed with extra [00:35:00] insights, visuals, and nuggets that didn't make it into the episodes. Plus you can revisit past editions anytime. If you want more or just prefer to read, you'll love it. Plus, it's a place for us to connect. Want the backstage pass to Got Marketing?
Subscribe [email protected]. Thank you. You listened right up until the end, so why not hit that subscribe button? And keep the good marketing rolling. Podcast reviews are like warm hugs and they're also the best way to support a small business. You can connect with me, Mia FileMan on Instagram or LinkedIn, and feel free to send me a message.
I'm super friendly.
