Dunkin’ Donuts “Genetics” Ad Ignites Firestorm After American Eagle Controversy

The coffee giant Dunkin’ Donuts faces mounting criticism over a new advertisement referencing “genetics,” marking the second major brand in a week to trigger backlash over language evoking eugenics concerns. The ad features The Summer I Turned Pretty star Gavin Casalegno promoting the Golden Hour Refresher with the line: “This tan? Genetics… I just got my color analysis back. Guess what? Golden summer, literally.” This comes just days after American Eagle pulled an ad campaign starring Sydney Sweeney that repeatedly emphasized her “great jeans” and “great genes” amid accusations of tone-deaf racial messaging.

Why Dunkin’s “Genetics” Reference Sparked Outrage

The timing proved explosive. With American Eagle’s campaign fresh in public memory—and against a U.S. political backdrop of rising white nationalism, anti-immigrant rhetoric, and attacks on diversity initiatives—Dunkin’s word choice struck many as dangerously naive or intentionally provocative. Social media erupted with condemnation, noting how both ads centered white celebrities (Casalegno is fair-skinned and blue-eyed) while using terminology historically weaponized to promote racial superiority theories.

Marketing experts point to a critical oversight. Dr. Lena Petrova, branding psychologist at Columbia University, stated: “When brands casually use ‘genetics’ while highlighting idealized white features—especially amid current tensions—they ignore how this language echoes eugenics propaganda. It’s either gross negligence or a calculated risk for engagement“ (Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2024). Neither Dunkin’ nor American Eagle has issued formal apologies, though American Eagle quietly removed their contested ads.

dunkin donuts ad

The American Eagle Controversy: A Recap

Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle campaign faced immediate fury earlier this week. Ads featured phrases like “Got those good good genes” alongside close-ups of her blonde hair and blue eyes. Critics highlighted how the campaign dropped during escalating hate crimes and legislation targeting minority groups. The Anti-Defamation League reported a 37% surge in white supremacist propaganda distributions in 2024, making the “good genes” framing particularly incendiary. Historian Dr. Marcus Greene commented: “Eugenics movements consistently used ‘superior genetics’ rhetoric to justify atrocities. Brands invoking this—even unintentionally—normalize dangerous ideologies” (National Museum of American History archives).

Broader Implications for Brand Marketing

This one-two punch of ad controversies reveals a stark disconnect between corporate messaging teams and societal realities. Consumer advocacy group BrandWatch issued guidelines urging companies to audit campaigns for coded language, emphasizing: “Words like ‘genetics’ or ‘bloodline’ now carry extremist baggage. Marketing must adapt to today’s sensitivities” (BrandWatch Advisory, July 2025). Both incidents also underscore how quickly social media amplifies ethical missteps—Dunkin’s ad garnered 15K+ critical tweets within 24 hours.

Public Backlash and Brand Silence

Reactions online ranged from exasperation to fury. “First ‘great genes’ and now ‘genetics’? How many dog whistles do these brands need to blow before they realize we HEAR them?” tweeted activist @RileyChen. Others noted the ads’ timing during record-breaking heatwaves disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. Despite the outcry, Dunkin’ continues running the Casalegno spot nationally. Marketing analyst Priya Sharma warns: “Silence reads as complicity. Consumers increasingly vote with wallets—brands ignoring context risk loyalty and revenue” (Forbes, 2025).

As genetic rhetoric enters mainstream advertising, these consecutive controversies expose a critical need for brand accountability. Dunkin’ Donuts and American Eagle now face a choice: acknowledge the harmful implications of their language or risk permanent reputational damage. Consumers must demand marketing that reflects inclusivity—not ignorance—in an increasingly divided world. Share this article to keep the conversation going.

Must Know

Q: What did Dunkin’ Donuts say in their controversial ad?
A: Actor Gavin Casalegno stated, “This tan? Genetics… Golden summer, literally” while promoting Dunkin’s Golden Hour Refresher. The ad links physical appearance to genetics amid ongoing debates about eugenics-coded language.

Q: How does this relate to American Eagle’s ad?
A: American Eagle’s campaign with Sydney Sweeney emphasized her “great genes” days earlier. Both ads used genetic terminology while featuring white celebrities, sparking allegations of racial insensitivity during heightened white supremacist activity.

Q: Why is “genetics” language problematic in advertising?
A: Historically, “superior genetics” rhetoric justified eugenics programs and racial hierarchies. Experts warn that casual use in marketing—especially highlighting white features—normalizes extremist ideologies in volatile political climates.

Q: Has Dunkin’ responded to the backlash?
A: As of publication, Dunkin’ Donuts hasn’t addressed the controversy or pulled the ad. American Eagle removed their campaign quietly but issued no apology.

Q: What real-world impacts could such ads have?
A: BrandWatch notes these messages can alienate minority consumers and inadvertently validate hate groups. Studies show repeated exposure to coded language increases tolerance for extremist views (Journal of Social Psychology, 2024).

Q: How can consumers respond?
A: Contact brands directly via social media or customer service channels demanding accountable marketing. Support companies with inclusive ad policies verified by groups like BrandWatch or ADL.