According to Inc, Nucleus Genomics launched a controversial subway ad campaign in New York City featuring ethnically diverse babies with messages like “IQ is 50% genetic” and “pick your baby.” The $32 million startup, founded in 2021 by Kian Sadeghi and backed by Alexis Ohanian’s Seven Seven Six and Founders Fund, saw the campaign drive a 150% sales surge and 8 million social media impressions despite widespread backlash. The company openly admitted they expected the campaign to “incite conversation” and curiosity, drawing inspiration from Levi’s controversial “Sydney has great jeans” ads. Meanwhile, the company just won a legal victory last week when Genomic Prediction’s request for an injunction was denied in federal court, though the trade secrets lawsuit continues.
The rage-bait playbook
Here’s the thing – Nucleus isn’t alone in this strategy. We’re seeing a pattern emerge across the tech landscape, particularly in the overcrowded AI space. Friend’s AI chatbot necklace ads were literally defaced across the city by critics who called it “AI sycophancy.” Cluely proudly promoted letting users “cheat on everything” before pivoting to note-taking. And Artisan AI’s “stop hiring humans” campaign earned a public reprimand from Senator Bernie Sanders. These companies aren’t just pushing boundaries – they’re deliberately crossing lines to get attention in markets where being polite means getting ignored.
Does outrage actually sell?
The numbers suggest it might. Nucleus is celebrating that 150% sales bump despite the negative backlash. Research from Tulane shows that people engage more with content that challenges their personal views – the classic “rage click” phenomenon. But here’s the question: is this sustainable marketing or just short-term noise? Building a brand on controversy seems risky when you’re dealing with something as sensitive as genetic testing and IVF. The company’s website at mynucleus.com promises “IVF for genetic optimization,” but critics are calling it eugenics with a tech coat of paint.
Legal battles and backlash
While the marketing might be working for now, Nucleus has other problems brewing. That lawsuit from Genomic Prediction alleges trade secret theft, and though they won the initial injunction battle, the war isn’t over. Founder Kian Sadeghi’s response on X was equally combative: “To the mob trying to cancel Nucleus. Keep tweeting. Stay mad. We’ll keep building.” It’s that same confrontational energy that defines this new wave of startup marketing. Basically, they’re betting that any publicity is good publicity – even when it comes with lawsuits and accusations of promoting modern eugenics.
Where does this lead us?
Look, we’ve seen controversial marketing before, but there’s something different about this generation of startups. They’re not just pushing products – they’re pushing ethical boundaries in healthcare, education, and human relationships. Friend’s AI companion technology, as detailed in this Guardian report, raises real concerns about dependency. Cluely’s manifesto still promotes cheating culture despite their pivot. And now we have a genetics company telling parents to optimize their babies. The question isn’t whether this marketing works – clearly it drives engagement. The real question is what happens when the outrage fades and these companies have to deliver on their promises to actual human customers.
