In a bizarre twist of fate, a murder case has transformed its victim into the face of a corrupt healthcare system. Brian Thompson, the UnitedHealthcare CEO, is now a symbol of systemic injustice in the eyes of the public. But let’s be clear — that does not excuse Luigi Nicholas Mangione’s actions. No grievance, no matter how justified, can validate taking another’s life.
Yet, here we are. Online commenters have drawn parallels between New York City and Gotham City, framing Mangione’s act as a vigilante-style rebellion against an unjust system. This isn’t a movement rooted in the left or right. It’s something in between — people from both sides of the political spectrum seem to agree that the healthcare system’s flaws are glaring. But here’s the truth: murder is murder. Violence should never be branded as heroism.
The Branding of a Killer
The story of Luigi Nicholas Mangione is quickly becoming an example of how branding works in real-time. Branding isn’t just for companies; it’s for people too. As much as advertising shapes the perception of a product, branding can shape public opinion about a person. Mangione’s story is being branded as a "revolt against injustice," with supporters painting him as a modern-day anti-hero. The question is, who’s controlling the narrative? Social media users, not marketing teams, are branding Mangione’s image.
This is where advertising, branding, and propaganda intersect. As online conversations heat up, people’s views are being shaped through viral tweets, TikTok clips, and opinion pieces. The public’s attention is the product, and everyone is fighting to control it. Mangione’s "brand" as a vigilante is being built one post at a time. And that’s dangerous.
Photo by Josh Hild on Unsplash
How Movements Rise and Fall
If there’s one thing history has taught us, it’s that movements start with a spark. Sometimes, it’s an injustice. Other times, it’s a tragedy. In this case, it’s both. The book "Delay, Deny, Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don’t Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It" by Jay Feinman has shot up on Amazon. It’s clear, people are ready to have this conversation about insurance companies prioritizing profits over people.
This isn’t the first time an injustice sparked something larger. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement began with a clear, peaceful mission: to end police brutality. It was supported across political lines until the violence and destruction of private property began. As seen in Hootsuite’s guide on social media and politics, social platforms play a pivotal role in shaping and shifting public sentiment during movements. When riots broke out, public support dwindled. The same potential exists here. A peaceful conversation about healthcare reform could turn into something far more destructive if propaganda and branding of Mangione as a “Robin Hood” figure continue unchecked.
This online trend hasn’t solidified into a full-blown movement, but it’s on the brink. It’s vital to understand that this can end with awareness, accountability, and reform — not violence. Two people’s lives have already been ruined: one is dead, and one will spend his life in prison. Nobody wins in this story.
Advertising a Cause Without Paying for It
Looking at this from a marketing perspective, the most notable aspect is that no one needs to run paid ads to promote the "cause" surrounding this case. The public’s interest is already there. People are naturally driven to discuss injustice, especially when it’s connected to something as personal as healthcare. This is how advertising works at its core — tapping into human emotion.
Look at how the conversation is spreading. It’s not through Google ads or social media campaigns. It’s through the power of user-generated content. This is a prime example of the organic marketing power that HubSpot discusses in its exploration of public perception and brand control. People are creating TikToks, Instagram Reels, and threads on Reddit. They’re doing the "advertising" for free. This is organic marketing in its purest form. But it’s also where chaos can emerge.
When branding a person, especially in a controversial light, it’s easy for narratives to spiral out of control. Propaganda thrives in these moments. If one side of the internet paints Mangione as a martyr, the other side will brand him as a criminal. Both are advertising messages designed to control public perception. This is the battleground where branding, advertising, and propaganda collide.
Propaganda’s Role in the Chaos
We’ve seen how media coverage and social media voices fuel branding narratives. Right now, companies like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook are being pressured to shut down posts that glorify Mangione’s crime. But is that censorship, or is it responsible content moderation? Here’s where it gets murky.
If tech companies remove certain voices from the platform, they risk feeding the "us vs. them" mentality. Suddenly, people feel silenced, and underground communities form to spread the message elsewhere. This creates an even more chaotic environment where conspiracy theories and extremism flourish.
But if companies do nothing, they’re allowing the branding of a killer to grow unchecked. It’s a no-win scenario. This is why it’s essential to strike a balance. We’ve seen it happen before with other high-profile cases. A little censorship can make a movement stronger. Too much freedom can turn a criminal into a symbol of "revolution."
The Real Story: Why Did Luigi Do It?
Now, let’s address the one thing nobody knows for sure: Why did Luigi Nicholas Mangione do it? We can speculate all day, but nobody except Luigi himself knows the true reason. Was it a personal vendetta? Was he radicalized online? Did he see himself as part of something larger?
There’s no easy answer. People want a simple, clean explanation, but life’s not that simple. Sometimes, advertising works too well. When the same message is repeated over and over — "insurance companies don’t care about you" — people internalize it. They start to see insurers as villains in their story. Mangione’s act of violence could be seen as a direct result of this narrative. But that’s not an excuse, and it’s certainly not justice.
Every villain has an origin story, and in this case, we’re watching it unfold in real time. The branding of Luigi Nicholas Mangione is still being written by thousands of voices online. No one knows the full truth of why he did what he did. And perhaps we never will.
Conclusion
This story is about more than one man’s actions. It’s about advertising, branding, and how public perception can be controlled, intentionally or not. The healthcare industry’s reputation is being rebranded overnight, not by ad agencies, but by social media users. Luigi’s story has become a product in itself — something that’s marketed, shared, and dissected.
If this becomes a movement, we have to remember how movements rise and fall. Anger can be a catalyst, but it’s not sustainable. Violence is never justified. Propaganda, branding, and advertising are powerful tools, but they’re also double-edged swords. Let’s hope this time, cooler heads prevail. It’s possible to fight injustice with peaceful methods — through the ballot box, through public discourse, and yes, even through advertising. Let’s not allow this tragedy to become another brand that divides us.
