Nike's "Runners Welcome. Walkers Tolerated" ad has many angry, thoughts? (Boston 2026). Update: Ad is pulled

Don't have an opinion, but it would be cool to qualify for their time standards as a racewalker (which is possible for elites)

Nike does not make a specialty shoe for race walkers (unlike some other brands).

Their top-of-the-line marathon road racing shoes (alphafly and vaporfly) are terrible for walking fast in due to stiff forefoot and plate.

Nike does not sponsor the Boston Marathon, adidas does. And adidas does not make a specialized race walking shoe either.

Depending on what wave they are in, participants have about six hours to cross the Boston Marathon finish line and be considered an official finisher. (must average under about 13:45 per mile).

So the Boston Marathon does cater to walkers, a few official finishers will walk the entire course, and many official finishers will walk large sections of the course.

Nike misses with that ad. Finishing the Boston Marathon is no longer revered among competitive runners like it once was.

How much will walkers with supershoes benefit compared to walkers in regular shoes?

I get that, but the people getting mad at it would get mad at it regardless of the context.

I just wish everything didn't have to water itself down for the lowest common denominator. These people are dweebs.

So what. Get a life. There's all levels and good for them. You do you, and leave it at that.

I wasn't offended. Truth be told, my wife only tolerates me.

Your reply makes no sense.

It is ballsy to come out and say that walking in a marathon sucks.

Nike has guts.

Apparently wokesters are peeved.

Soccer mom run/walkers spending a grand to wear BM gear…

Regardless of the ad the comment posted in a linked tweet is 100% or heavily AI generated. Same generic sentence structure, question at the end to trigger engagement and hashtags, it’s very obvious prompted output.

Boston's qualifier is about 150% of the world record. Or slower, depending on category.

I haven't done any specific training for 800 meters in ages, am over 50, and would have little to no trouble running a sub 2:31. That's a very slow time, nothing to be proud of.

Sign of the times that someone would have an issue with walking a "selective" marathon. It's the RD's own fault, probably. If it lived up to the reputation it wants, noone would talk about walking it.

Back in the day, Nike faced a lot of backlash for using the Beatles' "Revolution" in its first ads for the Air line.

The whole thing to me is indicative of how Nike has lost its edge. They used to have the best marketing campaigns ever. You watched a kick ass marketing campaign that was aspirational and maybe a bit exclusionary and it was Nike.

When is the last time we saw one of those?

I think the new CEO is trying to get the mojo back, but this one misses the mark. "Walkers tolerated" is just going to piss people off.

Some might argue that Nike back in the day had the slogan "Second place is the first loser" and it was negatively received. Is that one any different than this?

I think it is different. Nike still then was messaging it was for winners. I remember not really liking the "Second place is the first loser" but I got the message. Ultimately while I embrace the winners of the sport and running fast, the sport ultimately is about giving it your all.

Nike makes the best performance shoes on the market, the sponsor the best athletes on the planet, yet their marketing rarely shows it anymore.

How about "You earned this"? Then all the qualifiers would feel welcome and so would the charity runners. There is no other way to run Boston. It is exclusionary.

IP lawyers if someone steals my idea let this post be on the record as i came up with this idea.

But you know also what the old Nike wouldn't have done? Issued a statement apologizing for this. This was a nothing story and we have to apologize for it?

Get back to embracing being the best. Sell that message day in and day out

u mad

No, I just didn't see what the fuss was about, and some ads hit and some don't. What's the big deal?

But reading Wejo's comments make sense to me and I am somewhat persuaded.

Idk, seems like the whole fuss is just some inclusivity push that is unwilling to let a mild joke ride.

My reading is that is was an attempt at humor and given the context, not too bad of one.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear the Nike ad is targeted at the 30,000 Boston Marathon runners. I don't know how accurate the statement is: "Many people taking on the marathon next week will walk all or part of it." You have to qualify to run Boston. It's not a race where you simply pay your entry fee and then do whatever you want on the course. I wonder if the Instagram poster knows this? The ad isn't in the best taste but remember where it's coming from. Nike came up with the slogan: "Just Win." It's not just referring to sport, it's also their corporate philosophy. Do anything to win. The people who can't keep up, well, get belittled in ads.

Nike are scum, always have been, always will be. Do some research before you blindly support a brand.

Definitely this. Over analyze much?. It's basic, not edgy. Not a good ad either way. Just Snooze It. Face it people: The biggest demographic for running shoes is grandmas and nurses.

I agree with this. I think a lot of it is fake outrage from influencers trying to capitalize on a polarizing topic.

It’s a running race and it’s one of the most prestigious races in the world. Run it as fast as you can, and if you have to walk, that’s okay too.

It's so boring nobody cares. Lonely People that just want attention do those public clown marathons. It's sad to watch. They should run on trails, beach, which mas made for recreation. Closing down streets is a nuisance and a safety hazard.

Why is the victim mentality so strong nowadays? Its an ad. Not everything is for everybody.

Lets go Jess!!!

I, for one, am glad that Jeff Galloway never had to see the ad.