A temporary marketing campaign by the brewer Heineken has tapped into a deep vein of London sentiment, sparking a heated debate about the sanctity of the city's iconic Underground signage.
The Bakerloo Line Becomes 'Bakerl0.0'
The controversy began in early January 2026, when Heineken launched a promotional push for its non-alcoholic Heineken 0.0% beer. As part of the campaign, the brewer temporarily rebranded the Bakerloo line as the 'Bakerl0.0 line', with station roundels altered to include the numerical branding. Notable changes included renaming Oxford Circus station to 'Oxf0.0rd Circus'. Images of the campaign, shared online by journalist Ross Lydall, quickly went viral, dividing opinion among commuters and branding experts alike.
The Argument For: A Dose of Free Public Creativity
In defence of the campaign, branding expert James Kirkham, founder of agency Iconic, argues that in a digital age where creativity is often locked behind paywalls, well-executed brand work provides vital moments of free public art. He suggests that when done with intelligence and humour, such interventions can offer welcome levity in shared daily spaces like the Tube.
"The joke works because no one genuinely thinks the Bakerloo line has changed," Kirkham contends. He emphasises that the campaign is reversible and clearly playful, feeling like wit rather than vandalism, as it sits on top of the existing system without altering its fundamental colour or context.
The Argument Against: Undermining a Design Legend
Opposing the move, Darryl George, executive creative director at Krow Group, asserts that the London Underground's signage is a masterpiece of functional design, not a canvas for marketers. He points to the system created by Edward Johnston over a century ago, which earns trust through clarity and consistency.
George warns that allowing brands to hijack official signs risks fraying this trusted system and could lead to dangerous confusion or distraction for the millions of tired, phone-checking passengers. "The folks at London Underground HQ should remember that they, too, have a brand to protect, not just advertising space to sell," he states.
The Verdict: Clarity Versus Creativity
The core of the debate hinges on whether the Tube's primary function as a clear, navigable transport network can coexist with playful commercial creativity. While Kirkham's plea for more wit in public spaces is noted, the potential for genuine passenger confusion is a significant counterpoint. As seen in campaign images, some altered signs even displayed stations in the wrong order.
Critics argue that alternative avenues for creativity, such as poetry installations, murals, and traditional advertising panels, already exist on the network without compromising the vital clarity of wayfinding signage. The episode highlights Londoners' fierce protective instinct for a system they love to criticise, questioning where the line should be drawn between clever marketing and public utility.
