In-game advertising during this season's Six Nations has driven higher online engagement for two major brands, but social media reaction during matches skewed heavily negative, according to new data from Quantcast.
The adtech group tracked online engagement for Samsung and Virgin Atlantic in matches where their adverts appeared during scrum-related breaks in play. It also analysed social media sentiment around the split-screen format and its effect on the viewing experience.
Samsung recorded a 13% increase in engagement across the open internet, while Virgin Atlantic saw an 18% uplift. Quantcast measured interactions with related advertising across sites such as news outlets and blogs, rather than within closed social networks and subscription services. It calculated the percentage change by comparing engagement levels with the week before the Six Nations.
Social listening data pointed in a different direction. Sentiment around Samsung's in-game advertising skewed 63% negative, 32% neutral and 5% positive. For Virgin Atlantic, sentiment was 80% negative and 20% neutral.
The analysis suggests a gap between attention and approval. More people may interact with campaigns online, while viewers complain about distractions during live sport.
Scrum breaks
The in-game adverts ran during scrum-related stoppages in a split-screen format. Quantcast linked the placement to increased use of terms such as "boycott" and "annoying ads" in social media match coverage.
Meltwater provided the social listening and sentiment analysis, covering immediate reactions during games and commentary in the days that followed.
The findings come as broadcasters and rights holders try to balance the cost of premium sports rights with audience expectations around free-to-air coverage and production quality.
ITV and BBC Sport have agreed a four-year deal that keeps the Six Nations free-to-air through 2029, maintaining broad access across the UK and Ireland's home nations fixtures. ITV has previously linked in-game advertising to the economics of rights investment and broadcast coverage.
In-game ad formats are long established in some markets, particularly the US, where audiences are more accustomed to higher ad volumes within sports broadcasts. In the UK, rugby viewers have typically expected a clearer separation between live action and commercial breaks, with advertising clustered around half-time or pre-match segments.
Quantcast framed the split response as a warning for advertisers and broadcasters. It described in-game placements as effective for reach and interaction, but less reliable for positive brand association if the format clashes with the tone of the event or audience habits.
A key risk for brands is that higher visibility can amplify criticism as well as awareness. Viral backlash can spread quickly beyond the broadcast audience, shaping perceptions among people who did not watch live.
Quantcast also argued that better timing and targeting can reduce backlash. Advertisers should consider audience receptiveness-not just audience presence-when choosing moments for exposure during live sport.
Rights holders may also worry that negative reaction pushes viewers towards delayed viewing, highlights packages or unofficial clips, reducing the value of live broadcast advertising. It can also fuel debate about whether the commercialisation of free-to-air sport is changing the character of major events.
Industry tension
The data adds to wider industry tension between monetisation and the viewing experience. Sports rights have become more expensive as streaming services and international broadcasters compete for premium content. Free-to-air networks face tighter margins, increasing the appeal of new ad formats.
At the same time, broadcasters must protect audience trust and satisfaction. Rugby in particular relies on tradition and a shared national occasion. Advertising inserted into the flow of play can challenge those expectations, even during stoppages.
Quantcast marketing director Nisha Ridout said the reaction reflected a cultural divide over what counts as acceptable disruption in live sport.
"This data exposes a friction point between commercial objectives and long-standing fan tradition. While in-game advertising is a proven engine for engagement, it clashes with the sacred, uninterrupted rhythm of UK rugby. US-style mid-action ad formats do not translate automatically and represent a cultural challenge. For brands, the key takeaway is that visibility works best when it respects the viewing experience and the moments fans value."By opting for an omnichannel, data-led approach, brands can better understand when audiences are genuinely receptive rather than just present, allowing brands to deliver impact without disrupting the flow of the match. The goal is not to interrupt the game but to become a welcomed part of it."
Broadcasters and advertisers are expected to keep testing new live formats as they seek extra revenue from major events, with audience feedback likely to shape how in-game advertising appears in future Six Nations coverage.