So, this is where
advertising has finally reached, absolutely rock bottom. The first time I
watched the AJIO Mother’s Day advertisement, I watched it absent-mindedly. The
second time, it felt slightly uncomfortable. By the third viewing, it had
become so jarring and disturbing that it compelled me to write this piece.
Let us first understand how
all this began. Greeting cards and gifts
always existed. People have always exchanged tokens of affection. But it was
the brilliance of companies like Hallmark that transformed greeting-card
giving, and later gift-giving itself, into something almost mandatory to prove
love and affection.
Slowly, new “special days”
began appearing everywhere. Mother’s Day. Father’s Day. Grandparents’ Day.
Friendship Day. Valentine’s Day etc. And hold your breath, even “National Nothing
Day” where one was encouraged to give a card or gift for absolutely no reason
at all.
Marketing had discovered
something very powerful: emotions could be packaged, sold, and monetised. Surprisingly,
in India, this concept of formally “celebrating” parents with gifts on
designated days never fully worked for many older-generation families. Perhaps
it still does not, even today.
My father was at his
sarcastic best whenever we mentioned such occasions. He would acidly remark: “What
Mother’s Day and Father’s Day? You live with us, we love you, and you love us
back. There need not be one single Mother’s Day or Father’s Day. Every day is a
Mother’s Day and a Father’s Day.”
Then he would mischievously
add that the words “Mother’s Day” and “Father’s Day” sounded suspiciously like
“Amma Dinam” and “Nanna Dinam”, which in Telugu could almost sound like
mother’s and father’s death anniversaries!
That old-school Indian
mindset may sound amusing today, but there was wisdom in it. Relationships were
meant to be lived daily, not reduced to annual shopping festivals. Advertising,
however, has become extraordinarily skilled at converting emotions into
consumption.
Coca-Cola, for example,
helped popularise and commercialise the modern image of Santa Claus. Many
believe that the predominance of red associated with Santa today aligns
beautifully with Coca-Cola’s own brand colours and Christmas campaigns. It
shows how deeply advertising can shape public imagination and cultural memory.
And now we come to the AJIO
advertisement. The advertisement shows mothers “practising” and warming up as
though preparing for combat. One may initially assume they are training to
shoot enemies. But no, their targets are wooden dummies representing their own
children. And how do they attack these dummies? With chappals.
Now, in India, hitting
someone with a chappal is not merely punishment. It symbolises contempt,
insult, humiliation, and public shaming. The visual itself carries a deeply
negative emotional undertone in Indian culture. So what unforgivable crime have
these children committed? They gifted their mothers
coffee mugs or cushions carrying sentimental messages like “Best Mother in the
World.” Apparently, according to the advertisement, such gifts are “useless.”
So, mothers speaking
different languages are shown violently attacking dummies with slippers because
their children gifted them inexpensive but affectionate presents. And all this
is packaged as “therapeutic” in the advertisement.
At this point, one
uncomfortable question arises: Since when did a mother’s love become measurable
by the price tag of a gift? Any normal mother would probably be happy with
almost anything given with affection, a simple phone call, a handwritten note,
a rose, a hug, or yes, even a modest tea or coffee mug saying, “Best Mom.”
Are we now telling young
people that unless they buy expensive dresses, luxury handbags, or vintage
watches, their love is somehow inadequate? Certainly, elegant gifts are
wonderful. Nobody is arguing against gifting. A beautiful saree, a dress,
jewellery, or a watch may indeed make a mother very happy. But was there no
better way to communicate that message without insulting both the gift giver
and the gift receiver?.
That is where the
advertisement collapses completely. In one stroke, AJIO managed to antagonise
both the customer and the consumer. It indirectly mocked youngsters who may not
have the financial means to buy expensive gifts. Worse, it attempted to create
guilt around small but emotionally meaningful presents.
The symbolism became even
more absurd when the advertisement suggested: “Gift anything, even a chappal. That is better than gifting a
coffee mug.” That line alone probably destroyed whatever warmth the campaign
was attempting to create. And then they showed mugs literally breaking. Wonderful.
Nothing says “Mother’s Day
emotion” quite like smashing sentimental gifts with aggression and contempt. Perhaps
AJIO wanted to create a disruptive advertisement. Perhaps they wanted
controversy, conversation, outrage, and virality. In today’s digital
advertising ecosystem, shock value itself has become a marketing strategy.
If that was the intention,
then perhaps the campaign succeeded brilliantly. But emotionally? Culturally? Creatively?
The campaign failed spectacularly. Instead of celebrating mothers, it reduced
Mother’s Day into an exercise in material comparison and guilt-driven
consumption.
This advertisement may well
enter the annals of advertising as one of those campaigns remembered not for
brilliance, warmth, or emotional intelligence, but for how completely it
misunderstood the very emotion it was trying to monetise. And perhaps that is
the tragedy of modern advertising. Somewhere along the way, emotions stopped
being felt and started being packaged.
Key words: AJIO Mother’s Day ad, AJIO advertisement
controversy, worst Indian ad 2026, Mother’s Day marketing controversy,
commercialisation of emotions, emotional marketing criticism, Indian
advertising analysis, controversial Indian advertisements, consumer psychology
in advertising, gift culture in India, Mother’s Day consumerism, AJIO ad
backlash, advertising ethics India, marketing gone wrong, sentimental
advertising criticism, modern advertising trends, materialism in advertising,
branding and emotions, Hallmark marketing strategy, Coca-Cola Santa Claus
marketing, Indian family values, social commentary on advertising, digital
marketing controversy, emotional manipulation in ads, brand communication
failure, viral Indian advertisements, consumer behaviour analysis, critique of
modern advertising, advertising and culture, marketing psychology India.
What a beautiful thought
process. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the
Hyderabad Zoo proved exactly that. More importantly, it showed that inspiration
can come from any quarter.
Today, anyone with the name “David”
was given free entry into the zoo. You may ask, why? The occasion was the 100th
birthday anniversary of David
Attenborough, the world-famous wildlife photographer, broadcaster, naturalist,
and conservationist. Brilliant, wouldn’t you say? But the idea itself is not
entirely new.
When KFC entered Hyderabad
in the mid-1990s, it pulled off a very similar marketing stunt. On the opening
day of its first outlet, KFC came up with a wonderfully innovative sales
promotion. Anyone whose name started with the letter “K”, Krishna, Kavita,
Kranthi, Kushal, Keerthi, and so on was given a 50% discount.
Of course, in those days,
people had to produce proof such as birth certificates, college ID cards, or
other identification documents to avail the discount. Simple idea. Memorable
execution.
That is the beauty of
creative marketing. Sometimes the most effective campaigns are not the most
expensive ones, but the ones that make people smile, feel included, and talk
about the experience long after the event is over.
A campaign like this does
more than attract customers. It creates curiosity, generates word-of-mouth
publicity, and gives people a story to share with friends and family. Long
after the discount ends, the memory of the experience remains. That is the real
power of creative marketing.
