The longevity game
HighlightsCannes Lions 2025 has introduced a new sub-category for Long-Term Brand Platforms to celebrate brands that demonstrate sustained effectiveness in building equity and loyalty through creative communication over a minimum of three years. Industry leaders highlighted enduring brand platforms such as Dove's 'Real Beauty' and Nike's 'Just Do It', which have maintained relevance and cultural significance through continuous innovation and alignment with evolving societal conversations. The article emphasises the importance of long-term brand strategies, showcasing examples like L'Oréal's 'Because You're Worth It' and Mastercard's 'Priceless', which have created emotional connections and significant cultural impact over decades.
At a time when most campaigns vanish with a scroll,
Cannes Lions 2025
is placing a spotlight on what endures.
It recently announced a new sub-category — Long-Term Brand Platforms — to recognise platforms that show long-term effectiveness in building brand equity, fostering loyalty and delivering business results through continuous, creative communication. To qualify, brands must have been in the market for three years. They must show three or more distinct campaigns as part of an overarching
brand strategy
.
What are some ideas that have stayed beyond the buzz (and CMO tenures)? That have transcended media formats and become a part of culture? We asked industry leaders to name some 'brand platforms' they believe exemplify long-term thinking — creatively, strategically, culturally.
Rohan Mehta, CEO, FCB Kinnect
Global:
In advertising, fame can fade fast. But platforms that build brand equity over time, that's legacy. Dove's 'Real Beauty' platform has endured because it taps into a timeless truth: The gap between self-perception and societal beauty standards. The platform has been responsive to evolving conversations, from body positivity to digital distortion. From 'Reverse Selfie' to 'Detox Your Feed', Dove has kept the work real, emotionally resonant and socially progressive.
Nike's 'Just Do It' is one of the longest-running platforms in marketing history, staying relevant through reinvention. 'Dream Crazy' proved it could still challenge and lead —spotlighting athletes who rewrote norms. From [Colin] Kaepernick to kids with prosthetics, each story made 'Just Do It' feel urgent again, for a new generation, in a new world.
India:
HDFC Bank's 'Vigil Aunty' — a platform we've built — became a cultural utility. Fraud prevention isn't a glamorous brief, yet the platform made cybersecurity street-smart and WhatsApp-forwardable. Overall, these platforms have endured by adding new meaning every year. That's what brand equity looks like when it's earned, not engineered.
John Thangaraj, Chief strategy officer, creative and media, Dentsu India
Global:
Michelob Ultra, a premium American beer brand, that has long been positioned around drinkability with the tagline: 'It's only worth it if you enjoy it'. 'Enjoyment' as space for a beer brand might sound generic — until you see the jaw-dropping work they've put out year after year. Rooted in sport, they have activated everything from the NBA and F1 to tennis. But what makes them a shoo-in at Cannes is how they've done it — using cutting-edge tech to create sporting spectacles that are catnip for award juries. Think McEnroe vs McEnroe, Dreamcaster and my personal favourite, Lap of Legends.
India:
As cliched as it may sound, it would be Surf's 'Daag Achhe Hain'. In two odd decades, it's become the poster child for culture-led creative consistency. 'Daag Achhe Hain'/ 'Dirt Is Good' has been rendered globally in many ways, yet remains instantly recognisable, which is what makes it so powerful. Their recent 'Guess Who Won' campaign marked a bold shift into serious sport — and it's well worth a look.
Satbir Singh, Founder, Thinkstr.in
Global:
In an age when most brand campaigns last a mere thumb swipe, some of the world's most iconic brands built themselves on long-lasting platforms. The undisputed heavyweight champion is, of course, Nike's 'Just Do It', running well into four decades. 'Real Beauty' by Dove also comes to mind. McDonald's 'I'm Lovin' It' is another. All these campaigns not only mirrored emerging culture, but created a lot of it. They're part of folklore.
India:
Fevicol and Cadbury spring to mind. Brand managers and ad execs worldwide have envied these, wishing they could create something this long-lasting. Having worked on Incredible India and Red FM's 'Bajaate Raho!' (both going strong after decades), I'm glad Cannes created this category, especially at a time when many brands are happy settling for 200 LinkedIn likes instead of creating something lasting.
Jitender Dabas, CEO, Cheil X
Global:
It has to be L'Oréal's 'Because You're Worth It'. It's timeless, universal and rooted in a powerful emotional truth. It didn't just sell beauty — it sold self-worth. At a time when advertising spoke to women from a male lens, it handed the microphone back. Over five decades, it's evolved without losing its core, enabling premium positioning, inspiring diverse storytelling and building one of the most enduring emotional bonds in beauty.
India:
I'd pick Thums Up's 'Taste the Thunder'. It may not always get the same applause as more purpose-driven work, but it's a masterclass in sharp, consistent brand building. It didn't chase global cool — it stayed rooted in the Indian intensity. It has driven business impact. It elevates the product truth and lends itself to inspiring story telling.
Vikram Pandey, CCO, Leo South Asia
Global:
This new sub-category was long overdue. In a world increasingly obsessed with short-term impact and real-time metrics, it's important to pause and recognise the brands that have built more than just equity — they have earned trust, relevance and even created movements. Dove is a textbook example. With its 'Real Beauty' platform launched in 2004, Dove didn't just advertise differently — it redefined the conversation around beauty. What's remarkable is how the brand has managed to evolve the idea without diluting its core purpose.
India:
Whisper has done something powerful with its long-standing efforts towards keeping girls in school. Be it 'Missing Chapter', which championed inclusion of menstrual education in school, or 'Early Period', which addressed changing period biology by preparing eight-year olds, Whisper has, over the years, balanced purpose with business effectiveness while building one of the biggest platforms to help girls in India complete their education. Brands that manage to move the conversation forward, year after year, show us the real power of sustained creativity.
Sarvesh Raikar, President, Lowe Lintas
Global:
I love Geico's '15 minutes can save you 15%'. On the face of it, it doesn't even feel like a big strategic platform — but just an unusual use of statistic to make everyone relook at the category. It's provided some insanely good creative output over the years. Fresh and disruptive, time and again. It helped Geico become one of the giants in the segment and the line entrenched itself in America's pop culture. Now, what more can you ask for?
India:
Lifebuoy's handwashing education — 'Help A Child Reach 5' and 'H for Handwashing'. These have helped build the world's largest behaviour change programmes over years. Marketing guru David Aaker called it one of the best in the world. The campaign didn't just impart education, it built awareness around the importance of soap, which is critical for market expansion. It also forged public-private partnerships, secured government participation and brought home fame. While [the characters of] 'Gondappa' and 'Chamki' (Future Child) brought global attention on handwash-preventable deaths under the 'Help A Child Reach 5' umbrella, campaigns like 'H for Handwashing and [pygmy hippo] Moo Deng's 'resignation' evolved the platform to make handwashing an unforgettable habit.
Shilpa Sinha, Chief strategy officer, APAC, McCann Worldgroup
Global:
Mastercard and McDonald's. For more than two decades, both brands have delivered business growth and cultural relevance through timeless platforms rooted in universal human truths and activated in timely, resonant ways. Mastercard's 'Priceless' campaign redefined value by championing moments, experiences, inclusion and human impact — exemplified by 'Where to Settle', which used data to provide life-changing support to displaced refugees. McDonald's 'I'm Lovin' It' remains strategically simple and emotionally compelling upholding feel-good moments, brought to life through contemporary moments today. 'Raise Your Arches' reaffirmed its enduring power through wordless and pure brand coded iconic simplicity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Is Nike failing Caitlin Clark? Former insider call out brand for mishandling WNBA star
Caitlin Clark. Image via: Jesse D. Garrabrant/NBAE via Getty Images Caitlin Clark, the Indiana Fever star and arguably the most influential figure in women's basketball today, is at the center of growing criticism aimed at Nike. In April 2024, The sportswear giant signed Clark to a landmark eight-year, $28 million endorsement deal shortly after she was selected as the No. 1 overall pick in the 2024 WNBA Draft. But more than a year later, many, including former insiders, believe Nike has fallen far short of fully leveraging her unprecedented star power. Despite her fame, Clark has yet to receive a signature shoe. Over a year into the partnership, she has only received Player Exclusive (PE) sneakers from Nike's Kobe series. She has not been given a signature sneaker line or branded merchandise, marketing tools that are typically awarded to less accomplished male athletes. While she has appeared on national billboards and in a Super Bowl commercial, fans and insiders alike are questioning why Nike is holding back. In June 2024, when asked when her first signature shoe might arrive, Clark told reporters: 'I don't make those decisions so you'll have to wait and see.' At the time, she had not yet earned WNBA Rookie of the Year honors, which she would go on to receive in October 2024. Ex-marketing director speaks out The loudest critique came this week from Jordan Rogers, a former Brand Marketing Director for Nike Basketball, who spent over a decade at the company. In a TikTok video, Rogers accused Nike of mishandling Clark's immense marketability. He questioned the disparity between Nike's treatment of male and female athletes and how Clark, arguably the most culturally significant player since Jordan, hasn't received the same investment. "You have the single biggest needle mover in all of American sports since Michael Jordan , and you have somehow convinced yourself that you need to slow-play this?" Rogers said. He continued, "This seems like you have convinced yourself that this needs to be an either/or conversation. And we never have an either/or conversation in the men's sports , you have like 10 signature athletes [in the NBA], half of them don't deserve a signature shoe." Rogers further speculated that political backlash surrounding Clark may be making Nike hesitant to go all-in. "I am so confused as to why you wouldn't be doing bigger campaigns with [Clark]... One of the best explanations I can come up with is that you are wringing your hands and afraid to enter into this politically divisive conversation that has been co-opted by the media and pundits," he said. He ended his message to Nike with a plea: "You have the unicorn, the chosen one, the one who everyone wants to hear from, and you are just sitting around... Please, for the love of God, figure something out." Comparisons and fan frustration Clark's influence is undeniable. During her college career at Iowa, she played in two of the most-watched women's college basketball games in history. Her 2024 Elite Eight game against LSU drew 16 million viewers. Her presence at the WNBA Draft that year attracted a record 2.4 million viewers. In the WNBA, she has already claimed Rookie of the Year honors and is among the frontrunners for MVP this season. Yet, despite being one of the league's biggest stars, Clark lacks something her rookie classmate Angel Reese has secured: a signature shoe. Reese, who plays for the Chicago Sky, is set to release her own signature sneaker with Reebok on June 4. Fans have expressed confusion and disappointment, asking why Nike hasn't moved quicker to give Clark her own line , especially given her unmatched visibility and performance. Others are doing it better R ogers praised other brands , including Gatorade, State Farm, and Wilson , for doing a better job of embracing Clark's commercial appeal. 'Gatorade, State Farm and Wilson have all done a much better job in maximizing the value of the WNBA's 'unicorn' superstar,' he added. Fans have become increasingly vocal online, questioning Nike's apparent hesitation to give Clark her own brand line. Rogers' criticism only added to a growing sense of frustration. "I am so confused as to how you would be so invested in the WNBA for several years and you've been doing great work trying to elevate and uplift that league and many of the athletes," he said. As Nike faces mounting public pressure, the question remains: will they shift gears and give Clark the platform her popularity clearly demands? For now, all eyes, and expectations, remain on the brand to step up.
Economic Times
2 days ago
- Economic Times
Why we go bonkers for fancy brands – even when it makes no sense
Juliet's famous lament - 'What's in a name?' - questioning the value placed on names and lineage, found new relevance recently. Social media posts from Chinese manufacturers showcasing the production of high-end luxury goods in their factories - and urging consumers to buy directly from them, although without the brand label - once again highlighted the powerful psychological grip brands hold over us. Perceived value has been alluring to humans for as long as the species has existed. Things are coveted for the single and simple reason that they are coveted by others. Possession of such items gives one pleasure because of the thought that others now think they have reached some standing. Earlier, this covetousness was limited to precious metals and stones. This has now extended to brands. The dictionary defines a brand as 'a type of product made by a particular company and sold under a particular name'. This simple definition, however, only encapsulates the making and the selling - it does not touch the psychological dimension of emotions that a 'brand' generates for the brand's owners, and for those who want to be owners. For example, a wristwatch is not an object needed to tell time anymore. It is used to signal that one has arrived. If one brand signals status, then two must signal a higher one? Except if they are on the same product. I recently came across a real example. I saw a Maruti Omni mini-van sporting a Toyota logo - quite a jarring sight. It took me back to my school days in Pune, where on a 'Chor Bazaar' street in the cantonment area, you could find shoes bearing a Nike logo on one side and Adidas on the other. Now imagine a BMW with Jaguar's leaping cat gracing the hood, or a Louis Vuitton bag adorned with Chanel's interlocked area where dual brands don't cause cognitive confusion is academia. There are joint programmes offered by universities, and one can imagine a certificate with the logo of two universities. In fact, a degree that has the logo of two high-ranking colleges would be highly sought after. A similar psychological reaction is expected to an endorsement from multiple companies - say, as part of a joint training programme, especially if the entrance criteria are multiple brands don't make sense when they are on the same manufactured product. But they are coveted when they signal learning, or acquisition of complex calculus underlies our interaction with brands. An alien species studying human choices would reach these conclusions for our decision-making rules related to brands:1. Covet what others have and want.2. There's no constraint on items that can be pursued. Only rule 1 should be satisfied. These can be anything from tulip bulbs to colours on paper.3. Sometimes, one's own needs are superseded by Rule #2. 4. Show it off once it is acquired.5. Protect the label more than the product. The item loses its value if the label gets damaged - even if the product is functioning at full efficiency.6. One brand is good, two are super - but not in all instances (see above).6. Sometimes, ownership is not the goal. Acquire now to sell later at a higher value.7. Sometimes, showing off is not the goal. A concealed display is required to protect it. Just knowledge within the community that one owns it, is satisfying.8. Even though brand and label acquisition signals wealth, a direct demonstration of wealth -- such as displaying one's net worth -- is aliens might have to scratch their heads to make a logical framework that accommodates these behaviours. Even if they managed this task, they would be dumbstruck by learning what we think differentiates us from other species - that we consider ourselves rational. The writer is MD, Resonance Laboratories, Bengaluru (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. What's slowing Indian IT's AI deals? The answer is hidden in just two words. Jolt to Çelebi could turn a big gain for this Indian firm that once had deep Turkish ties Nestlé India's outgoing CEO Narayanan weathered the Maggi storm; Tiwary must tackle slowing growth Uncle Sam vs. Microsoft: Which is a safer bet to park money? ONGC squandered its future once. Can it be different this time? Will revised economic capital framework lead to higher RBI dividend to govt? These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 30% return in 1 year, according to analysts Buy, Sell or Hold: Emkay Global upgrades SAIL to buy; YES Securities sees 13% upside in VA Tech Wabag Railways stocks: Time to be contrarian; will bearish analysts go wrong again? 6 stocks, 2 with buy recos, 4 with sell recos
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- New Indian Express
Trump and Putin want to talk business once Ukraine war ends; Here's why it won't be easy
Hundreds of foreign companies left Russia after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, including major U.S. firms like Coca-Cola, Nike, Starbucks, ExxonMobil and Ford Motor Co. But after more than three years of war, President Donald Trump has held out the prospect of restoring U.S.-Russia trade if there's ever a peace settlement. And Russian President Vladimir Putin has said foreign companies could come back under some circumstances. 'Russia wants to do largescale TRADE with the United States when this catastrophic 'bloodbath' is over, and I agree,' Trump said in a statement after a phone call with Putin. 'There is a tremendous opportunity for Russia to create massive amounts of jobs and wealth. Its potential is UNLIMITED.' The president then shifted his tone toward Putin after heavy drone and missile attacks on Kyiv, saying Putin 'has gone absolutely crazy' and threatening new sanctions. That and recent comments from Putin warning Western companies against reclaiming their former stakes seemed to reflect reality more accurately — that it's not going to be a smooth process for businesses going back into Russia. That's because Russia's business environment has massively changed since 2022. And not in ways that favor foreign companies. And with Putin escalating attacks and holding on to territory demands Ukraine likely isn't going to accept, a peace deal seems distant indeed. Here are factors that could deter U.S. companies from ever going back: Risk of losing it all Russian law classifies Ukraine's allies as 'unfriendly states' and imposes severe restrictions on businesses from more than 50 countries. Those include limits on withdrawing money and equipment as well as allowing the Russian government to take control of companies deemed important. Foreign owners' votes on boards of directors can be legally disregarded. Companies that left were required to sell their businesses for 50% or less of their assessed worth, or simply wrote them off while Kremlin-friendly business groups snapped up their assets on the cheap. Under a 2023 presidential decree the Russian government took control of Finnish energy company Fortum, German power company Unipro, France's dairy company Danone and Danish brewer Carlsberg. Even if a peace deal removed the U.S. from the list of unfriendlies, and if the massive Western sanctions restricting business in Russia were dropped, the track record of losses would remain vivid. And there's little sign any of that is going to happen.
