Oreogate and Kumar Didn’t Need to Be Real to Work

What Ramp and Suno understand about human viral moments

If you’ve been anywhere on the internet the past couple of weeks, you’ve seen Oreogate: a mom upset that another mom is packing Oreos in her kid’s lunchbox. The whole thing plays out across screenshots of a parent group chat, with a gospel-style reading of the chat responses. It read as pure Karen content, and it went viral the way that content always does, with everyone trying to figure out if it was real. Was it a skit? Overparenting? Something else entirely?

Before that, there was Kumar, a retired accountant who appeared on Instagram shot like a movie villain, claiming he would become the world’s biggest accounting influencer. The high-end editing alone was enough to make anyone stop scrolling. Who was this guy, and what was he doing?

Both got covered as wild, organic internet content, but in reality, both were brand campaigns. Oreogate was a Suno partnership, and The Kumar Method belonged to Ramp.

Neither one was hiding it, necessarily. Every Oreogate caption made clear that the song reading of the group chat was made using Suno. Kumar’s own site said outright, weeks before Ramp’s name showed up anywhere, that he was engineered, not lucky. The label was right there. Most people scrolled past it anyway, which is exactly why this works: the content struck a chord and its “realness” became a part of the lore.

Both worked because they were plausible. The easiest way to get someone to believe a lie is to put a little truth in it. Mom chats have a well-earned reputation, so a mom going after another mom over lunchbox contents reads as something that could actually happen. It’s not hard to picture someone older figuring out social media well enough so they can build their personal brand. Neither story needed to be real for it to work. It just needed a premise close enough to real life for people to join the conversation without worrying if they should fact-check it first.

Both were also paced the same way: dragged out across multiple posts over several days instead of being resolved in a single video. That is how stories are told on TikTok and Instagram now—not all at once, but in installments. It is the modern-day version of the oral tradition, delivered one reel at a time.

In June, the reveal was that Kumar isn’t a real person; he’s an actor, and the account is an engineered virality system. It wasn’t until August that anyone confirmed the system belonged to Ramp, tied to a funnel that ends in a work-email gate.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kumar (@thekumarmethod)

Brands aren’t acting like brands anymore

What both cases illustrate is a fundamental shift in where brands focus their energy. Posting from a corporate handle is increasingly ineffective because users are trained to skip anything that smells like an ad the second they clock it. The workaround involves borrowing a genre that already spreads organically—whether that is unhinged parent drama or a villainous origin story—and routing the brand through it rather than leading with the product.

These campaigns tap into something deeper than a simple love for drama: people like a mess. Not just myth, but a genuine mess. A group chat spiraling over Oreos works because messy parent groups and judgmental parents are familiar enough that everyone has seen a version of them. Kumar works the same way; wanting to be the last person standing in your field is a recognizable feeling, especially where ageism abounds. Mess pulls people in twice: first, to watch the chaos play out, and second, to weigh in with how they would have handled it differently. That impulse to watch and then judge is what makes content travel—and we see this cycle repeat with every controversy.

Oreogate had another reason to engage on top of that. The videos ran the same gospel-leaning audio style that’s been trending across Instagram and TikTok for a while. It wasn’t just a mess doing the work. It was a mess wrapped in a sound and format the algorithm was already rewarding. Love it or hate it, it’s clear that Suno and the creator were paying attention to what makes people obsessed.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by ashleighjamz (@ashleighjamz)

The most effective way for a brand to reach people, by the brand’s own logic, is to not show up as a brand. The brand’s own voice, its own account, its own name attached to anything, has turned into a liability, but brands still need to be in the conversation. So… they have someone enter the conversation for them.

Does this do more harm than good?

This pivot comes with a cost that campaign metrics do not necessarily capture. Every time one of these stunts is unmasked, it teaches the audience to distrust the next unhinged group chat or too-strange-to-be-fake character—even the ones that are just genuine human moments. If the most human-feeling content on a feed turns out to be a marketing funnel, the reasonable response is to assume everything is fabricated. That is not a great trade for brands to make on behalf of the entire internet. When so much of the digital experience already feels performative, this is a recipe for deep-seated distrust.

What happens once the brand officially enters the narrative? Once a brand claims the content as its own, does it survive? Part of what made Oreogate and Kumar work was that the audience found them, argued about them, and shared them before anyone confirmed who was behind it. The victory lap is the moment that stops being true. My guess is no, or at least not in the same form. The thing that made it spread was the not knowing. Once the logo is attached, there’s nothing left to figure out.

Who really wins?

The real winner of Oreogate is Oreo. Suno ran the campaign, but Oreo is the one people rallied around, defended and kept talking about, all for free. And the timing didn’t hurt. Oreo makes a gluten-free version now, so the brand people were defending is also one more people could actually bring to the party. In addition to the tons of videos of moms sharing their own mom chat horror stories, there were just as many moms strategically buying Oreos in solidarity. 

It’s easy to get lost in algorithm changes and trend-hopping and lose sight of the bigger shift underneath all of this: brand content keeps evolving and has to keep up with consumers who are seeing every trend as they scroll. Oreogate and Kumar showcase the next stage of that evolution: content built specifically for a brand that doesn’t feel like a campaign at all.

People want to connect with other humans. It’s why employer content is doing better than brand pages on social. It’s why you’re more likely to engage with a stranger on the internet than a brand. We talk a lot about how AI is making us worry about what is real and what isn’t, but what happens when everything feels like a paid ad without the tag? I’m curious how that plays out for trust over time, not just in whether people can still tell what’s organic, but in how they end up viewing the brands that keep doing this.

Related: How Air Staged the Shortest CMO Tenure in Its History to Combat AI Slop