I WROTE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF BRANDING IN 2019. HERE'S WHAT I GOT WRONG

More than five years ago, I wrote a blog post predicting that the era of mass brand messaging was over.

I predicted that branding was moving away from trying to build "tribes" that consumers could belong to. I argued that centre of gravity was shifting away from brands and towards consumers. Social media had created a generation who expected brands to validate their personal values. Brands that couldn't keep up would face the consequences. I even called it a revolution, not an evolution.

I didn't have data to back most of it up at the time. Well, the data is in.

What still holds true today

1. The Death of Mass Communication:
I wrote, "Mass communication is dead. Audience targeting is heading out the door. The age of individualized messaging is upon us."

What 2026 is like: The "one size fits all" ad still exists for awareness, but it no longer builds deep brand equity. Brands now operate as "multiverses," showing different faces to different micro-communities with 89% of businesses are investing in personalization this year. What I called "individualised messaging" in 2020 is now table stakes.

2. Social media filter bubbles reinforce hyper-individualism
I wrote: "Social media has certainly helped create a sense of hyper-individualism because platforms are inherently designed to reinforce users’ personal filter bubbles."

What 2026 is like: The hyper-personalisation market is valued at USD30.38 billion in 2026, growing at 18.1% CAGR from USD25.73 billion in 2025. What was a rising trend in 2020 is now becoming the basic expectation of consumers.

A striking 93% of US shoppers say they're likely to continue shopping with a brand when it provides personalised experiences. 76% of customers express frustration when they don't experience personalisation. Personalisation drives measurable business results too. Companies earn 40% more revenue from it, personalised CTAs outperform generic ones by 202%, and 80% of businesses see more consumer spending with personalised experiences.

3. Brand values conforming to consumer demand
I wrote: "The centre of gravity is shifting away from the brand and towards the consumer."

What 2026 is like: The fact that Edelman's 2025 Brand Trust Special Report is titled From We to Me confirms this trend. 64% of people now say they choose brands based on their beliefs, up 4 points year-over-year. More than 1 in 4 American consumers consider brand values more today than they did five years ago, a trend even stronger among Gen Z at 36%. Over 80% of shoppers now seek out brands aligned with their personal values, and about 75% have stopped buying from a brand because its values clashed with theirs.

Gen Z and Alpha do not just buy products; they vote with their wallets. If a brand stays silent on a core issue that they personally feel strongly about, it is often viewed as undesirable or irrelevant. 73% of consumers surveyed said that a brand that authentically reflects their culture raises their trust in the brand. 53% assume that a brand is doing nothing, or hiding something, if a brand does not mention what it is doing to address issues consumers care about,

What I got wrong

1. The Rise of "Post-Purpose" Branding
I wrote: "Consumers are becoming less attracted to any brand’s values, and more interested to see if a brand’s values conform to their own."

What 2026 is like: Back in 2019, 70% of consumers felt it was important for brands to take a stand on social and political issues that align with their values, but by 2023 that number dropped to just 25% . Because of woke-washing and increasingly divisive algorithms which created consumer exhaustion, "performative activism" is easily spotted and punished. This has matured into something more intense: The Accountability Age.

It is no longer enough for a brand to "support a cause" or post a black square on social media. In 2026, consumers use AI-driven tools to audit a company's supply chain, political donations, and carbon footprint in seconds. Validation is no longer about what a brand says—it’s about what a brand is.

2. The "personal values" consumers want validated are not monolithic
I wrote: "Consumers are becoming less attracted to any brand’s values, and more interested to see if a brand’s values conform to their own."

What 2026 is like: In my original write-up, I mentioned that D&G and Chick-Fil-A faced consumer backlash and forced to align with consumer values. But we're seeing a "backlash to the backlash." This implied that pressure would flow one way — consumers demanding values alignment from brands. What has emerged instead is bidirectional - Consumers have flip-flopped on brand activism many times in the last five years together with shifts in political or economic cycles, with real commercial consequences. .

While 82% of consumers expect brands to voice a stance on social issues, 60% will stop buying from a brand if its stance contradicts their own personal beliefs. One in three consumers are concerned about brand content expressing social or political views that don't align with their own. The "tightrope" is real and is pushing brands over in both directions. We have seen the consequences with the KFC boycott in Malaysia.

Brands are learning they cannot be everything to everyone. Instead of trying to hold values that appeal to everyone, some brands choose a strategy of "Focused Purpose" - choosing their "side" more boldly and accepting the loss of the opposing consumer segment. The other trend is "Radical Neutrality" - with brands refusing to take any sides at all and choosing instead to stay in their own lane.

3. missed the economics vs. values gap
Edelman's CEO acknowledged in 2025 that, "Some people say they care about sustainability or nationalism, then go buy a $5 shirt from Shein. There's a practicality to it. Economics often wins." The say-do gap between stated consumer values and actual purchase behaviour is significant and complicates any simple values-alignment playbook.

What has progressed even further

1. From Values To Feelings
I wrote: "Audiences will expect brand messaging to provide validation of their personal values."

What 2026 is like: Brands have now replaced institutions like governments as the most trusted voice in the culture. This is the most interesting development. The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer describes a significant pivot: while brands have been expected to promote their values through social causes they champion, consumers today are looking to brands they trust to provide stability in their lives, amidst an environment of economic pain, geopolitical turbulence, and cultural upheaval.

68% of consumers surveyed said that it’s very or extremely important for brands to help them personally feel happy, confident, inspired, safe, and calm. This shift from values validation to personal validation is the frontier trend emerging in 2026.

2. Hyper-personalization driven by AI and Big Data
I wrote: "...digital and social media marketing is moving towards hyper-relevance, micro-targeting, and hyper-personalisation, with Big Data and AI enabling this in a big way."

What 2026 is like: Almost eight in ten marketers now rely on AI to tailor content, and AI is expected to drive over 95% of customer interactions in the near future. Hyper-personalization has shifted from a competitive differentiator to a standard consumer expectation.

Algorithms have moved beyond just "what we like" to "predictive mirroring"—anticipating our moods and moral stances before we even express them. Generative AI has taken this further. In 2020, we talked about "micro-targeting." In 2026, even that feels outdated. Thanks to Generative AI, we are moving past "market segmentation" (grouping people) to "N=1 Marketing" - consumers co-creating their own experiences with brands. This is making consumers even less tolerant of brands that feels "out of sync" with their personal worldviews.

3. AI and AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) are rewriting what brand visibility means.
The brand–consumer relationship is no longer built by social feeds and ad targeting. AI is now having an influential say about a brand when no human marketer is in the room.

Of the 55% of Edelman's survey respondents who use generative AI platforms, the vast majority use them to research brands, compare products, and summarise reviews. AI recommendations helps consumers filter out the marketing noise to get the personalised answer they expect.

So the biggest challenge for a brand today isn't just "getting attention"—it’s bypassing the Personal AI Gatekeeper. To get past the AI "gatekeeper," brands now need to think about content that delivers relevance, credibility, and clarity to prove that it aligns so perfectly with the user's "Personal Value Profile" that the AI deems the brand worth mentioning to the user.

Where do we go from here?

As we look toward the five years, the stakes have been raised the stakes to a critical level.

The greatest stake in hyper-individualisation is the erosion of a shared reality. If every consumer has a brand experience tailored specifically to their biases—we lose the cultural "common ground" that brands used to provide. This creates a marketplace where we are never exposed to different perspectives, further polarising an already fragmented society.

The consumer-centric shift has made brand loyalty incredibly fragile. Because the "centre of gravity" is the consumer’s own ego, the moment a brand fails to mirror that ego perfectly, it is easily discarded. There is no more "forgiveness" in branding. One misaligned tweet or one supply-chain hiccup can trigger a mass-exodus.

As brand managers navigate this landscape, the challenge is no longer just about gaining attention—it’s about maintaining integrity in a world where the "truth" is whatever the consumer wants to see in the mirror.

The ultimate stake is simple: In a world where brands are built to reflect our own values back at us, will we ever see anything other than ourselves?