Stop Speaking Brand and Start Speaking Human
BeenThereDoneThat
We harness the World’s best thinkers to solve the World's toughest problems
Hi, it's Melanie here.
I turned 35 last year and, along with it, was unceremoniously dumped into the "35–45" demographic box. As Samantha Jones from Sex and the City might say, “Welcome to my box.” Except, unlike Samantha, I’m not strutting through life in a metallic crop top with cosmopolitans on tap. If anything, my life is more meal planning, failing said meal planning, and spending ￡600 a month at Tesco on emergency dinners.
But here’s the kicker: when branding agencies and startups dream up their archetypes—“Samantha, 35–45, female, cosmopolitan city-dweller, loves fun, fashion, eating out, and eating in (wink wink)”—it sounds suspiciously like me. Except it’s not. And when the campaigns and products land to market, it’s no surprise that they don’t capture me as a customer. Because (as much as my alter ego would like) I’m not a Samantha. I’m the 30 something who spends 5–6 nights a week at home, 45 minutes from London’s Soho buzz, with my cat, two kids and a partner. I’m the one meal-prepping for the week (badly), splurging occasionally on a Michelin tasting menu but mostly on sushi takeaway, and tossing Perello olives, elderflower cordial and Tony’s Chocolonely into my Tesco basket to make the mundanity of life feel a bit more deluxe. I’m not one-of-a-kind—there are loads of women like me. But when brands lump us all into a single “demographic,” they lose us entirely. Demographic Boxes Are Dead. Long Live the Micro-Tribe.
We’ve all heard it: “If you’re speaking to everyone, you’re speaking to no one.” But when it comes to pinpointing their people, brands are still terrified of leaning in. Instead, they cling to the safety of broad, one-size-fits-all demographics. And it’s a big problem.
Here’s the truth: the 35–45 Samantha box might have made sense in the 2000s. Back when media was still mass and Sex and the City was the pinnacle of aspirational marketing. But today? The world is more nuanced. Streaming algorithms serve us niche content. Social media connects us to micro-communities with oddly specific vibes. And as consumers, we expect the same level of intimacy from the brands we buy into.
Think about it: how nice is it when you meet someone and realise you share the same humour, music taste, and lifestyle quirks? You’re not just “35–45” and female. You’re someone who bonds over Schitt’s Creek quotes, avoids small talk, and actually loves a tacky family resort in Lake Garda for the mix of kid chaos and Aperol spritzes. That level of connection feels magical. So why is it so hard for brands to replicate? The Fear Factor
I think it boils down to fear. Brands are scared that if they narrow their focus, they’ll alienate potential customers. But here’s the irony: by trying to speak to everyone, they alienate everyone.
It’s the equivalent of showing up to a party and saying, “I love… music! And food! And Netflix!” Cool. We all do. But what if you said, “I’m obsessed with mid-2000s emo bands, garlic bread, and The Great British Bake Off.” Suddenly, you’ve got people (albeit not the entire room) nodding along, ready to bond. The same goes for branding.
The brands that succeed today are the ones that aren’t afraid to alienate the wrong people to deeply connect with the right ones. Look at Glossier, who built a cult following by speaking to millennial women with skinimalist aspirations. Or Liquid Death, who turned water into a lifestyle brand for edgy, punk rock enthusiasts. Neither tries to appeal to the masses, but both have built wildly loyal audiences.
Enter: The Top Trumps of Branding
This brings me to my solution: the Top Trumps of branding.
Bear with me. About eight years ago, a good friend made me a personalised deck of Top Trumps cards. Each card ranked my family and friends on arbitrary traits—humour, karaoke talent, emotional availability. It was equal parts hilarious and horrifying to see your entire social circle ripped apart by a divisive ranking system.
But it got me thinking: what if brands treated their audiences like a pack of Top Trumps? Instead of lumping us into broad brackets, they could rank micro-communities by hyper-specific traits and build campaigns accordingly.
For example, instead of “Samantha, 35–45,” you get:
Building Brands for Humans, Not Brackets
The truth is, most of us aren’t looking for brands that understand our age bracket or income level. We’re looking for brands that get us. Brands that feel like they’re part of our crew—whether that crew is bonding over Real Housewives, the new Middle Eastern spot for a date night, or the unapologetic joy of staying in on a Friday night looking at my fig tree.
So here’s my challenge to marketers: stop speaking “demographic.” Start speaking human. Use the tools at your disposal—data, analytics, cultural nuance—to build micro-tribes, not mass audiences. And don’t just speak to these tribes—celebrate them, quirks and all.
Because if a campaign doesn’t make your audience feel like they’ve just met their new best friend? It’s already failed.
领英推荐
Let’s trade the tick boxes for Top Trumps and build brands that don’t just sell—but connect. After all, isn’t that what we’re all really here for?
Melanie Goldsmith Co-Founder of Juicy Brick
Further reading:
We'd love to hear what you thought about this newsletter. Reply in the comments below or reach out to us! To find out more about BeenThereDoneThat, connect with us on LinkedIn or visit our Website. If you'd like to receive the School of Athens weekly newsletter every Friday directly to your inbox, subscribe here. If you'd like to get in touch about working with us or to hear more about what we do, email [email protected]
Founder/Meditation teacher - mindworksmeditation
1 个月This is so on point. In marketing and in life, connection is the thing we are starving for, and so badly need for our happiness and to genuinely thrive!