Sydney Sweeney rose to fame as the authentic, multidimensional “it girl” of Euphoria, admired for her mix of ambition, beauty, and charm. But in recent years, her branding has taken a noticeable turn pivoting toward male-centered audiences and right-leaning associations, alienating the very women who once championed her. Controversial ad campaigns and male-centered branding choices reveal the high stakes of misaligned branding in today’s pop culture landscape, and why talent alone may no longer be enough to sustain her.
Sydney Sweeney rose to fame in 2019 when she was cast as Cassie Howard in HBO’s Euphoria. In a cast full of incredibly talented and beautiful women, Sydney was a perfect fit. She was an instant “it girl.” Her brand was relatable, ambitious, and unexpectedly multidimensional. Fans (including myself) admired the contrast between her hyper-sexualized and a little manic character, and her real-life pursuits, like studying business at UCLA or posting videos of herself fixing cars. Her early branding resonated deeply with women precisely because it countered the way men objectified her. Women empathized with her, rooted for her. They didn’t just see her as a beautiful face but as someone combating a sexist stereotype with authenticity.
But a noticeable shift in her branding has occurred. Sydney seems to brand herself as increasingly right-leaning and male-centered, a complete 180 to the persona she first presented to audiences. The girls who catapulted her to stardom for her appeal now dislike her. And her Euphoria costars now reportedly refuse to do press with her. So, what are the consequences of making branding decisions that betray your core audiences? And what decisions brought her there?
Perhaps her most recognizable controversy is her recent American Eagle ad, which Sweeney poses in front of the tagline “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans,” a double entendre on the word “genes.” Audiences say the ad was off-putting, with an undertone of eugenics and white supremacy. When asked to speak on that interpretation in an interview with GQ, Sweeney seemingly avoided the question, saying, “When I have an issue that I want to speak about, people will hear.”
Fans also noted Sweeney’s attendance at billionaire Jeff Bezos’s wedding, where she reportedly hit it off with the notorious Scooter Braun, widely unpopular among the pop-culture audience. When you’re in a space where your fans also admire Zendaya, Barbie Ferreira, and Hunter Schafer—actresses who have publicly spoken out on social issues—aligning yourself with right-leaning values can be detrimental to your brand.
Sydney has partnered before with Miu Miu, Tory Burch, Guess, and Fenty, all overwhelmingly female-leaning brands. She recently pivoted, however, toward collaboration that center a male-dominated audience: the “HEYDUDE” campaign and the disgustingly testosterone-flooded “bath soap” venture, to name a few. This pivot was not subtle, and female audiences noticed. Many feel alienated by a shift that seems to contradict the foundation of her early appeal.
It seems that the core of Sydney’s brand is now centered on her appearance. While there is nothing inherently wrong with leveraging one’s looks, Sydney chooses to rely on the fastest depreciating asset that male audiences value. It pays quickly through brand partnerships, but I believe that it never pays forever. The entertainers who build empires like Rihanna, Selena Gomez, and Beyonce, do so by appealing to women and build brands with depth beyond their looks. Women are the most powerful consumer audience in pop culture. They build careers. They sustain them. They support. They defend. They spend.
That’s why Sydney’s male-gaze centered branding decisions are puzzling, given her own words. She once said to Glamour UK: “the biggest misconception about me is that I’m a dumb blonde with big tits.” But if she’s trying to break out of that stereotype, why market herself to the exact demographic who predominantly views her that way?
It’s not impossible to reshape your public image—Margot Robbie, for example, did exactly that. After The Wolf of Wall Street, she could’ve been permanently typecast as the sexy blonde. Instead, she took on the producer role and starred in I, Tonya, where she embraced the complex female obsessed artist, and ultimately built a female-driven brand that culminated in Barbie. Women saw depth, agency, and vision, so they supported her accordingly.
Sydney’s own athlete film Christy could have been a turning point: a gritty biopic about a female athlete, the exact type of project that typically galvanizes female audiences. But it’s hard to sell a female-centered story when the star has positioned herself as someone women largely disliked or feel pushed away by. The film’s premise will attract women, but Sydney’s brand repels them. I believe that it’s a branding contradiction that weakens the project and Sydney’s own image even more, ultimately resulting in record low box office numbers.
None of this means Sydney Sweeney lacks talent or potential—she most certainly has both. But talent alone can’t compensate for a brand without direction. Out-of-place partnerships put her career in danger, because those deals suggest she doesn’t know who her audience is anymore. And in a cultural landscape where pop culture skews liberal, young, and female, that confusion is costly.
Sydney does not need to change who she is to appeal to a larger demographic. She just needs to return to the version of herself that women saw, supported, and genuinely liked. Because that audience is that one that could have made her unstoppable.