Why Brands Can’t Stay Neutral Anymore: What Trump vs. Zelensky Teaches Us About Influence Marketing

In an unprecedented Oval Office confrontation on February 28, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over Ukraine’s refusal to negotiate with Russia. The heated exchange, broadcast live, sent shockwaves through diplomatic circles, but it was the public reaction that truly defined the moment.

Elon Musk wasted no time, taking to X to declare: “Zelensky destroyed himself in the eyes of the American people.” In another post, he questioned, “Time to find out what really happened to the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to Ukraine…”

Actor Pedro Pascal, known for Narcos, Game of Thrones, and The Last of Us, showed his support for Ukraine by posting a map of the country with the caption, “Courage has a name” and the hashtag #StandWithUkraine. He later shared a portrait of Zelensky, writing: “Stay on the right side of history. Glory to Ukraine.”

Not just individuals, but even brands took sides. In a bold move, Norwegian fuel supplier Haltbakk Bunkers announced it would immediately stop providing fuel to U.S. Navy vessels in Norway, calling the White House’s treatment of Zelensky a “backstabbing spectacle” and urging other European companies to follow their example.

This generated an immediate reaction, with US officials contacting directly the Norwegian government and Elon making sure the news would reach the broad public.

The incident highlights a fundamental shift: public perception is increasingly shaped by influencers and brands on social media, rather than traditional news outlets.

This unfolding event is a real-world demonstration of what Trump vs. Zelensky teaches us about influence marketing, showcasing the power of influencer-driven narratives in moments of high political drama.

When brands become political, whether they like it or not

For years, marketers debated whether taking a political stance was a smart move. Some argued brands should stay neutral, focusing on universal values. Others embraced inclusivity, aiming to appeal to everyone. But in today’s polarised world, silence is often seen as taking a stance in itself—and the data proves it.

Do consumers really care about a brand’s political stance?

On the surface, not really. Only 8.8% of Americans explicitly research a brand’s political views before purchasing. Even among Gen Z (15.2%) and Millennials (11.2%), the numbers remain relatively low.

But here’s the catch: other key purchase factors—brand values (19.1%) and recent news about the brand (15.8%)—are often linked to politics. Scandals, corporate activism, and ethical controversies blur the line between “values” and “political stance.” Consumers may not actively search for this information, but when a brand’s position makes headlines, they react.

Source: HCG Elaboration of GWI Zeitgeist data, December 2024, USA

Values matter more than consumers admit

The contradiction becomes even clearer when looking at purchase intent. When asked, “How likely are you to purchase from a brand if its political stance aligns with your values?” nearly half (45.9%) of Americans said they were somewhat or very likely to do so. Among Gen Z, that number jumps to 59%—a generation raised in an era where brands openly engage in social and political issues.

Gender differences also emerge: 48.1% of U.S. males factor in political alignment when making a purchase, compared to 43.7% of females.

Source: HCG Elaboration of GWI Zeitgeist data, December 2024, USA

Why does this matter? Because even brands that built their success on universal, inclusive messaging are shifting. Nike, for example, once centered its brand on “everyone can be an athlete” messaging, showcasing underdog stories (Find your greatness campaign). Today, its positioning is far more polarizing—hyper-masculine, competitive, and focused on winning at all costs (Winning isn’t for everyone campaign).

The shift to influencer-led political persuasion

If political stances impact brand loyalty, where do consumers form their opinions?

• Social media dominates. In the 2024 U.S. election, 3% of Americans cited social media as the most influential source for political decisions, surpassing traditional TV news (30.1%). Globally, this number was even higher at 47.7%.
• Gen Z relies on social media even more. Nearly 50% of Gen Z voters say social media influenced their views, while Baby Boomers still favor TV news (only 4% of them rely on social media for politics).
• Peer influence is rising. Among Gen Z, 33.5% cite family and friends as a top influence—far more than in any other generation. Brands looking to engage young consumers must lean into community-driven, peer-amplified messaging.

Source: HCG Elaboration of GWI Zeitgeist data, December 2024, USA 

How political influence mirrors brand strategy

Joe Rogan, host of The Joe Rogan Experience, didn’t officially endorse Trump-Vance in 2024, but his podcast—one of the most listened-to in the world—became a hub for discussions on free speech, media distrust, and government overreach. His unfiltered conversations built a level of trust that traditional media struggles to match, particularly among young male voters.

Brands are following a similar playbook. Gymshark, the fitness apparel brand, built a billion-dollar business without big-name athlete sponsorships. Instead, it partnered with micro-influencers—aspiring bodybuilders and fitness coaches with small but highly engaged audiences. These influencers showcased real workouts instead of scripted ads, making Gymshark feel authentic and aspirational. The same did Danone with HiPro and CrossFit coaches and the list could go on and on with tons of other consumer tribes.

Quick disclaimer: yes, tribal marketing has experienced a huge comeback and is here to stay.

What Trump vs. Zelensky Teaches Us About Influence Marketing: the three most important things that Marketers can learn from politics

In summary, the clash and its aftermath show us exactly what Trump vs. Zelensky Teaches Us About Influence Marketing—highlighting the power of rapid, influencer-driven narratives in today’s media landscape.

1. Niche influence over mass appeal

You can’t reach everyone with one message. The era of broad, inclusive branding is being replaced by audience-specific messaging tailored to distinct belief systems, communities, and values.

2. Distribution matters as much as the message itself

Reach your audience where your audience is. Social media has been king during last elections, but not for all generations. Baby Boomers still preferred traditional channels for example. Each brand should carefully plan their media plan according to the preferences of all their sales targets.

3. Real-time reactions win. Brands must recognise and respond to digital debates as they unfold—just like political campaigns strategically deploy influencers to control narratives.

Speed Matters More Than Ever.

The harsh truth? If you want to win at real-time marketing, you have to play by real-time rules. That means weekends, late nights, and constant monitoring. If a major cultural moment happens and your brand reacts two days later? You’ve already lost the opportunity.

A collage of reactions from opinion leaders and influencers around the world

Even writing this article required weekend work, rapid analysis, and a relentless focus on speed. In today’s world, that’s the cost of relevance.

Related Posts

THE DUAL NATURE OF PERSUASION

Matteo Rinaldi The meanings of persuasion The term “persuasion” is fascinating; it deriv…

Restarting from peeling the onion: A Human-Centric approach

Matteo Rinaldi Many companies have understood the key to success. The key is to ask ourselves the ri…

11 Most Common Execution Mistakes

Matteo Rinaldi Most of us grow up with parents telling us that we will learn from our mistakes. As t…