A big cultural or public moment can be irresistible to brands. A sporting victory, a viral joke, a heroic act or a national achievement can bring instant attention, cultural relevance and a chance to enter conversations already happening at scale. But in the race to be seen, one question is becoming harder to ignore: does every big moment really need a brand?
The recent case of Captain Smit Machchhar, who helped save passengers during an in-flight emergency, brought the question into focus. Mankind Pharma pledged ₹1 crore to support Machchhar and his family, while SpiceJet, where he had spent 11 years, publicly saluted him. The two interventions may have shared the same moment, but their brand connections were very different.
For Karthik Shankar P S, Independent Leader, Digital & Content Marketing, Leadership, Social & Communication Strategy, the distinction comes down to whether a brand has a genuine connection to the person or cause and whether it stays involved after the headlines disappear. SpiceJet's relationship with Machchhar is immediately understandable because of his history with the airline. Mankind Pharma's intervention, meanwhile, can be read through its broader association with supporting people and frontline heroes. "The connection has to be visible to the audience without anyone explaining it," he says. For him, the real test comes later. If a brand continues to support the cause after the PR cycle ends, it is participation. If it disappears with the next news cycle, it was simply a campaign.
Kruthika Ravindran, Director, New Business & Key Accounts, TheSmallBigIdea, offers an even simpler test: would the brand have done it if there was no PR around it? If the answer is yes, visibility becomes a consequence rather than the objective. Her other test is to take the logo away. If the idea still makes sense, there is likely a genuine reason for the brand to be there.
That thinking is echoed by Vishal Nicholas, Chief Creative Officer, Komerz Glassbox, who believes an authentic intervention should "give more to the moment than it extracts from it". He draws a line between participation and trend-jacking, where brands attach a clever line and logo to a tragedy, triumph or cultural phenomenon simply to farm impressions.
The difference, he argues, lies in brand history or brand truth. Mankind Pharma's intervention has greater credibility because it fits a longer narrative around supporting frontline workers, national heroes and everyday champions. At the other end of the spectrum is Pepsi's infamous Kendall Jenner protest ad, where the brand's lack of a credible right to participate became the story itself.
For brands trying to establish that right, Darshana Shah, Brand & CX Strategist and Founder, Darshana Shah Advisory & Consulting, proposes four filters: purpose, permission, proof and persistence. Does the moment connect to why the brand exists? Has the brand earned the right to speak? Is it contributing something tangible, such as money, expertise, access or action? And will it still care once the news cycle moves on?
The absence of these filters has created plenty of forgettable moment marketing. When Neeraj Chopra won Olympic gold in 2021, brands rushed to congratulate him despite having no connection to the athlete. His management company eventually warned brands against unauthorised use of his image. Similarly, Chandrayaan-3 triggered a flood of moon-themed brand posts, few of which remain memorable.
There are also examples of brands getting the balance right by giving the moment more than they take from it. Cadbury's 'Not Just a Cadbury Ad' during Diwali 2021 used its advertising space and Shah Rukh Khan's voice to promote neighbourhood stores struggling after the pandemic, putting local businesses rather than the chocolate brand at the centre.
Prachi Malhotra, Co- Founder, Monkey Business believes context matters just as much as relevance. A brand needs to understand who is involved, what tone is appropriate and what people might actually value from its participation. The bar should also change depending on the moment. A sporting win or pop-culture joke allows more room for play, while grief, tragedy and sensitive social issues demand considerably more restraint.
That distinction becomes important in a culture where brands can react within minutes. Manas Gulati, Co-Founder and CEO, ARM Worldwide, points to the mock-apology format that spread across brands such as Skoda, Volkswagen, Haldiram's and Myntra in 2025. While individual executions were entertaining, the sheer volume showed how quickly a cultural format can become a template. "Being first isn't the same as being relevant," he argues. Sometimes the smarter role is to facilitate, amplify, celebrate or add something useful rather than become the protagonist. Britannia's response to the viral "Prashant" mispronunciation of croissant illustrates this. Rather than simply posting about the joke, the brand built on the audience-created moment and eventually turned "Prashant" into limited-edition packaging.
In a post on LinkedIn, Sandipan Ghosh, CEO, Chocolates & Confectioneries, Lotus Chocolates at Reliance Consumer Products, put the debate more bluntly: "Is this gratitude, or is it borrowed attention?" He points to Anand Mahindra's gifting of SUVs to Olympians as an example of a gesture that feels natural because it reflects behaviour he has demonstrated over time, rather than a one-day campaign.
Ultimately, visibility itself is not the problem. Brands are in the business of building visibility. The question is what the visibility is attached to. As several marketers point out, the person, achievement or cause should remain the hero, with the brand acting as an enabler. Sometimes that means funding something useful. Sometimes it means giving someone a platform. Sometimes it means amplifying people already doing the work. And sometimes, the most credible response is to stay out of the frame.
