I want to dig into something that nobody really talks about: the specific ways that bilingual campaigns break, beyond just “translation is hard.”
We’ve been working with Russian-root brands that want to expand into US markets, and we’ve also got US brands testing the Russian market. And there’s this pattern I keep hitting: campaigns that feel perfectly aligned in strategy meetings completely miss the mark in execution because nobody actually accounted for how different the context is in each market.
Let me be concrete. We had a beauty brand that’s huge in Russia—really established, strong cultural positioning around luxury and heritage. When they wanted to enter the US market, the temptation was just to translate the messaging and adapt the visuals. But the actual problem was deeper: the US audience doesn’t care about the same aspects of luxury that the Russian audience does. In Russia, heritage and craftsmanship matter enormously. In the US market we were targeting, the audience cared way more about sustainability and innovation.
So the campaign we’d built—which was technically “translated” into English and “localized” with US imagery—was still fundamentally Russian in its value proposition. It didn’t land.
What I realize now is that bilingual campaign planning can’t be a translation + localization process. It has to be a research + strategy process within each market, and then you build bridges between those two strategies if you want your brand to have a cohesive global narrative.
That takes longer, costs more, and requires you to actually have people in each market who understand both the local context and your core brand. But it’s the difference between a campaign that feels off and a campaign that actually resonates.
I want to hear from people who’ve done this successfully. How are you actually thinking about bilingual campaigns? Are you starting from a single global strategy and adapting it, or are you starting from two market-specific strategies and then looking for the overlap?
You’ve identified the core issue: audience values are culturally rooted, and they don’t translate. You can translate words, but you can’t translate cultural meaning without losing it.
Here’s the framework I use: instead of building one campaign and translating it, I commission two separate research initiatives in each market. Proper audiences interviews, cultural context mapping, the works. Then I look at what’s actually driving purchase intent in each market. Usually there’s some overlap, but there are always critical differences.
For your beauty example, the Russian value play (heritage, craft, quality) and the US value play (innovation, sustainability) might actually support each other if you tell that story right. Heritage + innovation. Old world quality with new world values. But you have to see that pattern first, not assume it.
The cost is real, but so is the payoff. A campaign that actually resonates in each market will outperform a “global” campaign that half-works in both markets, every single time.
Are you thinking about commissioning separate research for your next bilingual campaign?
This makes so much sense, and it connects to something I’ve learned about influencer partnerships across markets. When you’re bringing in a partner (influencer, collaborator, whoever) to represent your brand in a new market, they need to understand not just your brand, but the context of that market. And without that context, even a great influencer can’t make the campaign work.
I’m now looking for partners who have deep roots in their market and understand both the local audience and the broader brand story. It’s harder to find those people, but the quality of partnership is so much better.
For your Russian beauty brand entering the US: did you identify local influencers or partners who could help communicate that bridge between heritage and innovation? Or were you trying to do it all through brand-led content?
I’d be very curious to see the performance data comparing your old translation-based approach to the new market-specific research approach. Can you quantify the difference? Like: what was the engagement rate, conversion rate, and CAC on the old campaign versus what you’re seeing now?
Because strategically, what you’re saying makes sense—research should drive better creative, which should drive better performance. But I want to see the actual numbers to understand whether the extra research investment and longer timeline is worth it.
Did you run any control groups or A/B tests comparing the localization approaches?
This is exactly what we’re building into our client services now—a separate discovery phase for each market before we build a unified campaign strategy. It delays the project timeline, which clients sometimes resist, but the ROI on that research investment is solid.
One thing I’d add: you also need to account for campaign management differences across markets. Some markets require more hands-on influencer management, others are more self-directed. Some markets respond to timing you’d never predict. The UK market we work in requires much more lead time for influencer content than Russia does. If you don’t build that into your project timeline, the whole campaign gets compressed and suffers.
For the beauty brand: when you launch in the US, are you planning to have separate campaign management and approval cycles for each market, or are you still trying to synchronize everything globally?
From the creator side, I just want to say: when a brand comes to me with a campaign that’s been translated and"localized" for the US market but clearly wasn’t designed for the US market, I can feel it. The messaging sounds off, the values don’t align with what my audience actually cares about, and it’s hard for me to authentically promote it.
But when a brand has done their homework and understands what actually resonates in this market, I can work with that. Even if I’m creating content in English about a Russian brand, if the value prop makes sense for my audience, I can tell that story authentically.
I think what you’re describing—market-specific strategy before unified campaign—actually makes the creator’s job way easier. We’re not trying to force-fit a Russian narrative into an American context. We’re actually building something that belongs in this market.
When you launch in the US with that approach, would you want to work with creators who understand both markets, or strictly with US-based creators?