A new advertising campaign from Brazilian footwear giant Havaianas has unexpectedly ignited a political controversy as the year draws to a close. The dispute,stemming from a television spot featuring actress Fernanda Torres,has quickly escalated into a boycott led by supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro,revealing the increasingly polarized climate in Brazil [[3]]. This incident underscores how even seemingly apolitical consumer brands can become flashpoints in the countryS ongoing political battles,with immediate financial repercussions [[1]].
A popular Brazilian flip-flop brand, Havaianas, has become the unlikely center of a political firestorm in late December 2025, highlighting the deep divisions that continue to shape the country’s political landscape. The controversy, sparked by a new advertising campaign, has pitted supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro against his opponents, demonstrating how easily cultural products can become entangled in political battles.
What’s the Story?
Table of Contents
The dispute began after Havaianas released a television commercial featuring actress Fernanda Torres, who remarked she hoped people would start 2026 stepping with both feet, rather than just the right one. Supporters of Bolsonaro quickly interpreted the statement as a political jab, viewing it as a symbolic slight against the right-wing movement. This led to a widespread boycott campaign across social media, according to reports from Spanish newspaper El PaÃs.
Brazilian flip-flops
Response from Bolsonaro Supporters
The backlash was swift and visible. Eduardo Bolsonaro, the former president’s son, posted a video online showing him discarding a pair of Havaianas sandals into the trash as a protest against the brand. Online campaigns, utilizing hashtags and calls to action, urged consumers to boycott Havaianas products, with many claiming the advertisement represented an anti-right-wing political stance.
Economic Impact
The controversy quickly impacted Havaianas’ market value, resulting in an estimated loss of approximately £20 million in the first few days of the boycott. This illustrates the potential for political campaigns to significantly affect major brands’ financial performance.
Social media users responded in a variety of ways. Some on the left defended the advertisement, while others suggested that those participating in the boycott donate their flip-flops instead of destroying them, or to turn the campaign into a form of political satire.
The situation was further complicated by online users who seized on the opportunity to criticize Bolsonaro himself, referencing his ongoing legal issues and behavior during court proceedings. The development underscores the volatile nature of political discourse in Brazil and the potential for seemingly innocuous events to escalate into broader conflicts.
