Nicole Johnson

The Sydney Sweeney denim ad sold jeans and spiked stock prices, but its playful pun carried the weight of history, exposing the risk of clever marketing without cultural awareness.

It takes just three words to unravel decades of advertising progress: Great. Genes. Sydney.

When American Eagle launched its Sydney Sweeney denim campaign on July 23, the message was meant to be playful.  “Great jeans” became “great genes”, a pun that seemed designed for TikTok captions and Instagram shares. Instead, it carried a weight the brand didn’t seem to anticipate. Rather than simply promoting denim, the ad resurrected Western beauty ideals that historically linked desirability with whiteness, thinness, and even the illusion of genetic superiority.

To a 19‑year‑old scrolling on their phone, the ad may have registered as little more than a split‑second wink. For viewers who understand the history behind the phrase “good genes,” it felt like a cultural gut punch. For decades, that language appeared in both advertising and pseudo‑scientific discourse, quietly suggesting that beauty and value could be inherited, and that the ideal traits were overwhelmingly European.

Why This Ad Felt Off

The issue wasn’t just Sydney Sweeney or her appearance. Celebrities like Beyoncé have also fronted denim ads, such as her 2024 Levi’s campaign, but did not face backlash. The difference here was the combination of Sweeney’s and her association with the pun on “genes.

The pun carried historical baggage. For decades, “good genes” has been linked to old beauty standards and even early 20th‑century ideas about genetic “superiority.” Pairing that phrase with a blonde, blue‑eyed actress made the ad feel like a throwback to a time when fashion celebrated a very narrow version of beauty.

What was meant to be playful instead reminded many viewers that even in 2025, a brand can still send a message that leaves people out.

According to The New Yorker, American Eagle’s choice to feature Sweeney, a blue‑eyed, blonde actress, reignited that visual hierarchy for many viewers. The brand framed the ad as playful and aspirational. However, for a portion of the audience, it felt like a regression, proof that clever wordplay is not the same as culturally literate messaging.

A Divided Audience, One Viral Campaign

American Eagle’s core shoppers are between the ages of 15 and 25. This demographic is the most racially and ethnically diverse generation in U.S. history, and one that frequently vocalizes its demand for inclusivity. Yet this is also a generation raised on the mechanics of viral media. Quick-hit campaigns often succeed on familiarity and visibility rather than thoughtful messaging.

Older millennials and Gen X viewers, roughly ages 30 and above, interpreted the ad differently. They came of age during the rise of body positivity and media literacy, and many immediately noticed the undertones in the “good genes” phrasing. Business Insider reported that much of the early backlash gained traction on Twitter and Instagram among this older cohort.

This divide explains the paradox that followed. Younger viewers scrolled, shared, and in many cases bought. Older audiences critiqued, posted think pieces, and amplified the conversation. Both actions fueled the same outcome. The campaign went viral.

Sales Soared, Even as Trust Wavered

Financially, the “Great Genes” campaign delivered. According to U.S. News & World Report, American Eagle’s stock price:

Jeans sales grew 15%

Online orders rose 20%

Social media mentions increased 70%

Earned media valued at $65 million

Those numbers show how celebrity and controversy triggered visibility, even as the campaign’s message alienated some audiences. Sydney Sweeney’s star power drew eyes. The controversy amplified reach. Together, they created a wave of visibility that translated into sales, even as the cultural messaging clashed with the expectations of a socially conscious generation.

The Price of a Viral Moment

The “Great Genes” campaign demonstrates the gap between brand attention and brand loyalty. Gen Z may be vocal about inclusivity, but in a fast-moving attention economy, visibility often trumps values. Many younger consumers likely shared the ad for its celebrity appeal without reflecting on the subtext. Others shared it in critique, which ironically extended its reach. Either way, the conversation drove impressions, and impressions drove sales.

This highlights an important truth about brand loyalty in an age of virality. Engagement does not automatically translate to emotional connection. Gen Z’s outrage can amplify awareness, but fleeting interactions do not build the long-term trust that shields brands from reputational fallout. American Eagle may have gained a revenue spike, but it did not necessarily gain deeper loyalty among the Gen Zers.

So who was this campaign really speak to? On the surface, it targeted Gen Z. In reality, its execution echoed a nostalgic, pre-social media vision of beauty that resonated more with investors than with any diverse, modern audience. The ad spoke most clearly to algorithms, shareholders, and the culture of online spectacle.

American Eagle’s campaign sold denim and dominated social media. It also reminded us that the loudest campaigns are not always the smartest ones. Attention can be bought, but credibility is far harder to keep.