This piece hits. Especially the part about “Ideas That Never Saw Daylight”—I’ve got a whole Google Drive of those. As someone working in Gen Z marketing, I think what a lot of brands still don’t get is that playing it safe actually feels riskier now. If you’re not tapping into culture in a way that feels a little unhinged or opinionated or honest, you’re invisible.
MSCHF is a masterclass in cultural fluency, but even on a smaller scale, the brands we see winning on campus and in creator circles are the ones letting go of brand voice polish and leaning into real-time experimentation. Risk doesn’t always have to look like controversy—it can be giving your interns a TikTok password, pulling up at a student event with zero decked-out brand zone, or saying something you’re not sure Legal would approve. But that’s where connection lives.
We’re in the era of "main character brands"—and you can't be one if you're scared to post the plot twist.
Oh man, that Benetton ad is seared into my memory - the image is really quite beautiful - like a painting. Some might say they took it too far, to the point of exploitation, but those images will go down in history as some of the most provocative creative ever.
Yes, sometimes strategy is about reinforcing a brand's pillars, but I'd argue that strategy is an inherently risky practice, or good strategy at least. It should be critical, challenge a norm; think about what's to come and imagine/explore what form is best for an entity take in that future. Whether it ends up doubling down on the brand's current strategy or flipping it on its head, thorough strategy requires one to imagine something new or different before that decision - to stretch one's thinking and vet all possibilities before deciding what's the best approach to become stronger in the future. This is what's lacking in strategy across all industries right now, this imagination that is so crucial to rigorous strategic thinking. Everyone has become so literal (a deck for a denim brand that only references other denim brands) and reflexive ("what are others doing?"), killing any trust in imagination and ability to tone intuition.
I'm often surprised that concepts of risking, shocking, being totally different are considered genius artistic creativity. I think they are acts of courage, but they're not genius. The get-media-at-all-costs adage doesn't really hold up. It's cool if you're an artist and you want to get seen quick. Those ads you refer to are shocking and risky. But Nike and Benneton aren't doing too well. LVMH should be ok once this dip is over though. There's an obsession about being different in marketing - it's wrong: https://martinsoler.substack.com/p/tell-newsletter-75
This piece hits. Especially the part about “Ideas That Never Saw Daylight”—I’ve got a whole Google Drive of those. As someone working in Gen Z marketing, I think what a lot of brands still don’t get is that playing it safe actually feels riskier now. If you’re not tapping into culture in a way that feels a little unhinged or opinionated or honest, you’re invisible.
MSCHF is a masterclass in cultural fluency, but even on a smaller scale, the brands we see winning on campus and in creator circles are the ones letting go of brand voice polish and leaning into real-time experimentation. Risk doesn’t always have to look like controversy—it can be giving your interns a TikTok password, pulling up at a student event with zero decked-out brand zone, or saying something you’re not sure Legal would approve. But that’s where connection lives.
We’re in the era of "main character brands"—and you can't be one if you're scared to post the plot twist.
Oh man, that Benetton ad is seared into my memory - the image is really quite beautiful - like a painting. Some might say they took it too far, to the point of exploitation, but those images will go down in history as some of the most provocative creative ever.
Yes, sometimes strategy is about reinforcing a brand's pillars, but I'd argue that strategy is an inherently risky practice, or good strategy at least. It should be critical, challenge a norm; think about what's to come and imagine/explore what form is best for an entity take in that future. Whether it ends up doubling down on the brand's current strategy or flipping it on its head, thorough strategy requires one to imagine something new or different before that decision - to stretch one's thinking and vet all possibilities before deciding what's the best approach to become stronger in the future. This is what's lacking in strategy across all industries right now, this imagination that is so crucial to rigorous strategic thinking. Everyone has become so literal (a deck for a denim brand that only references other denim brands) and reflexive ("what are others doing?"), killing any trust in imagination and ability to tone intuition.
I'm often surprised that concepts of risking, shocking, being totally different are considered genius artistic creativity. I think they are acts of courage, but they're not genius. The get-media-at-all-costs adage doesn't really hold up. It's cool if you're an artist and you want to get seen quick. Those ads you refer to are shocking and risky. But Nike and Benneton aren't doing too well. LVMH should be ok once this dip is over though. There's an obsession about being different in marketing - it's wrong: https://martinsoler.substack.com/p/tell-newsletter-75