What We’re Reading is a monthly roundup of current news, commentary, challenges, and trends that impact our industry and clients. This month’s coverage highlights how brands are navigating opportunities and challenges in real time—from capitalizing on major cultural moments and platform constraints (Knicks momentum, World Cup sponsorship limits) to managing reputational risk tied to AI use, leadership decisions, and stakeholder expectations. Across industries, a consistent theme emerges: organizations that act with clarity, creativity, and strong values-driven frameworks are better positioned to shape perception, maintain trust, and turn moments of disruption into strategic advantage.
Digital & Social Media Strategy
All Aboard! Brands Jump on the Knicks Bandwagon. – Tania Ganguli, The New York Times
“The Knicks’ championship functioned as a full-scale cultural unifier—ads during playoff games drove consumer search behavior nearly 32% above primetime norms, with overall ad impact up 41% year over year—proof that the moment was doing the marketing heavy lifting, not the brands themselves. Brands like Bobbie, a baby formula company, jumped on the bandwagon with a cheeky social media post, resulting in about 500% more engagement and views than one of the company’s typical Instagram posts. With the increased engagement, it’s a great opportunity for brands to understand how to reach audiences beyond their immediate purview, giving them something to root for and relate to across different industries.” – Catherine Wycklendt
How Levi’s turned FIFA’s stadium censorship into one of the biggest brand moments of the World Cup – Maria José Gutiérrez Chávez, Fast Company
“Levi’s response to FIFA’s debranding rules highlights how constraints can create opportunities for brands to show up in more creative ways. By leaning into the limitation and then extending the moment across social media, the company turned a compliance requirement into a broader content strategy that reinforced its brand recognition. It’s a reminder that how a brand responds to restrictions can shape perception just as much as traditional marketing efforts.” – Emma Smits
Reputation Management
‘So much for caring about the environment’: REI faces backlash over AI-generated ad suspicions – Jude Cramer, Fast Company
“REI is facing criticism after a social media ad featuring distorted visuals sparked accusations of AI-generated content, fueling backlash that felt especially pointed given the brand’s sustainability positioning. The company later clarified that the issue stemmed from being auto-enrolled in an AI tool that altered a vendor-provided image, but not before consumers questioned the authenticity of the campaign and its alignment with REI’s values. For communicators, the moment underscores how quickly perception can outpace intent. As AI becomes more embedded in marketing workflows, even unintentional use, or poorly vetted outputs, can introduce reputational risk. Strong oversight, clear guardrails and alignment with brand purpose are critical to ensuring emerging technologies enhance, rather than undermine, credibility.” – Jenny Cummings
Meta Culpa – Aki Ito, Business Insider
“The only thing shocking about this article is the fact that an enormously successful company like Meta, whose entire business is built on understanding human behavior, seems surprised that a very demanding work environment, ‘big brother’ oversight of employees’ daily tasks, forcing employees to train their AI replacements, and massive, poorly communicated layoffs would all combine to impact not only morale, but business performance. The path out of this self-inflicted quagmire requires genuine, disciplined and consistent application of much more human leadership over time.” – Nick Kalm
The Communications Dilemma for University Presidents – Andrew Jarrell, O’Dwyer’s
“Higher education has become one of the most unforgiving communications environments in recent memory—and the pattern of presidential departures over the past two years makes the stakes impossible to ignore. This piece cuts to the real issue: it’s not just about what you say, it’s about having a deliberate framework for when to speak and what values anchor the message when you do. The presidents who survived intense pressure didn’t do so by being more articulate. They did it by being clearer—on institutional values, on where they would and wouldn’t plant a flag, and on saying so before the crisis arrived. That’s a lesson that applies well beyond campus.” – Kate O’Neil
Public Relations
The “revenge of the publicists”: How comms execs are moving into the C‑suite – Katie Deighton, Wall Street Journal
“I’m sure any communications professional loved reading this article! It captures a shift we’ve been seeing build for a while—communications is no longer a support function, but core to how companies operate as reputation, narrative, and stakeholder trust become business-critical at the C‑suite level. As issues move faster and scrutiny intensifies, leadership teams need communicators in the room early to shape strategy, not just when something goes wrong.” – Lindsay Erickson
McDonald’s bringing back fried apple pie to celebrate America’s 250th birthday – Landon Mion, FOX Business
“McDonald’s revival of its fried apple pie is a textbook example of how to make nostalgia work harder. By tying the return to America’s 250th anniversary, the brand gives a decades-old product a clear, timely reason to re-enter the conversation—turning a simple menu change into a culturally relevant moment.
By leaning into what audiences already feel, McDonald’s positions the pie as a shared memory rather than a new offering. The takeaway: nostalgia is most effective when it’s anchored in timing, not just sentiment. McDonald’s shows that the strongest campaigns don’t just look back—they connect the past to a reason to care right now.” – Grace DuFour
Crisis Communications
Harley-Davidson anti-DEI campaign revs up over new ‘woke’ allegations – Jessica Guynn, USA Today
“Harley-Davidson’s ongoing DEI backlash underscores how quickly brand controversies can resurface when narratives aren’t fully reset. Even after adjusting its policies, criticism towards Harley-Davidson’s leadership decisions reignited scrutiny, highlighting the importance of consistent, long-term messaging in crisis management. Brands that respond reactively without a clear position risk prolonging the conversation rather than containing it.” – Emily Schultz
The Data-Center Panic Is Overblown – Elias Wachtel, The Atlantic
“This piece is a useful counterweight to the narrative environment our infrastructure clients are navigating every day. According to a recent Gallup poll, 71 percent of Americans oppose the construction of new AI data centers in their area—and that number is being driven substantially by misinformation about water use, grid strain, and rate impacts. There are now anti-data center grassroots groups in 49 states, and 75 projects worth a combined $130 billion were disrupted in just the first quarter of 2026. The opposition is organized and it is fast. What Wachtel gets right is that the antidote isn’t silence—proactive, localized communications that get accurate information into communities before opponents define the project is the most reliable tool developers and their partners have for keeping critical infrastructure on track.” – Michael Grimm
KPMG Australia’s chairman and two partners resign as audit scandal widens – Christine Chen, Reuters
“KPMG Australia is in the midst of a compounding reputational crisis centered on the company’s ethics due to staff misusing confidential client information. For a professional services firm, that goes to the heart of their reputation and business and should be treated as such. As this article, and previous ones by Christine point out, that has not been how KPMG has addressed the issue. The lesson here is to ensure you have a process that prevents making decisions you have to later walk back; when you do, it just extends and escalates the crisis and the conversation window. KPMG has done this repeatedly, and appears to suffer from an insufficient process to review decisions with a reputational lens. They viewed the whistleblower as a workplace issue and not one of ethics or professional audit standards. Their Chairman invoked professional privilege in parliamentary comments instead of expressing remorse and proactive actions being taken. And ‘corrective’ actions have dripped out as if they are just trying to find ‘the one’ that will stop the crisis. The results are stark: KPMG has lost its CEO, audit chief, chairman, and two senior partners, was temporarily banned from federal contracts, has current contracts under review and has had to launch four separate internal investigations.” – Andrew Moyer