The Rise of the Sober Rave: Why Festivals Are Embracing Moderation

Festival culture is sobering up - literally.

In 2025, a new kind of headliner is taking the stage: moderation.

Long tied to indulgence and excess, festivals have traditionally been synonymous with alcohol. But for a growing number of Gen Z and Millennial audiences, that link is starting to fray. Instead, a cultural shift is gaining ground - one that prioritises presence, connection, and personal autonomy over default behaviours.

Whether driven by mental wellness, a desire to stay sharp, or simply shifting social norms, today’s festivalgoers are showing up differently. For many, the decision to go alcohol-free isn’t about missing out - it’s about showing up fully.

📉 The Stats Tell the Story

• In the US, alcohol consumption among 18–34s has fallen from 72% to 62% over the last two decades (Gallup).

• Gen Z drinks 20% less than Millennials at the same life stage (Berenberg/WSJ).

• 58% of Gen Z plan to drink even less in 2025, citing mental health and productivity (NCSolutions).

• The no/low alcohol market is growing at +10% CAGR globally (IWSR).

This shift isn’t hypothetical - it’s playing out across real spaces and live events. At Coachella 2025, Heineken® 0.0 reported a 125.5% increase in sales compared to the previous year. In the Netherlands, consumption of 0.0 beers at festivals rose by 35%. Globally, Heineken 0.0 is now available in over 120 markets.

But this is bigger than a single brand. It’s a cultural reset.

🍺 The Brands Moving With the Beat

Lucky Saint, the UK-based alcohol-free beer brand, has become a fixture at mass-participation events like the Hackney Half and the AJ Bell Great Manchester Run, serving on-tap 0.5% beer to thousands of runners. These aren’t sober-only spaces - these are mainstream, high-energy cultural moments where moderation isn’t marginal. With its new Lemon Lager and branded experiences, Lucky Saint is proving that 0.0 doesn’t mean compromise - it means choice.

Meanwhile, CleanCo, co-founded by Spencer Matthews, is expanding the no-alcohol spirits category with a growing portfolio of gin, rum, tequila and whiskey alternatives. Positioned as “beyond mocktails,” the brand sold 8.8 million drinks in 2024 and is backed by figures like England cricket captain Ben Stokes. It’s not just sober - it's serious. And it’s fast becoming a staple in both wellness spaces and premium nightlife.

Together, these brands reflect a growing truth: non-alcoholic isn’t niche anymore - it’s a domain with its own credibility, creativity and commercial weight.

🎯 What This Means for Festivals, Brands and Marketers

For Festival Organisers
Moderation isn’t the opposite of partying - it’s a new way to engage. Forward-thinking festivals are no longer hiding 0.0 options behind a side bar. Instead, they’re investing in premium non-alc experiences: curated menus, dedicated spaces, and credible partners that reflect the values of their audience. These additions aren’t just inclusive - they're commercial, experiential, and increasingly expected.

For Alcohol Brands
Zero-alc is no longer a side hustle. It’s a central pillar of future-facing portfolios. Brands need to move beyond “offering an option” and start positioning 0.0 products as relevant lifestyle choices with taste, branding, and storytelling to match. This is about expanding the category - not shrinking expectations.

For Brand Marketers
The shift towards moderation is an opportunity to rethink how joy, identity and connection are expressed. Campaigns that centre presence, confidence and clarity are landing harder than those tied to consumption. This generation doesn’t need alcohol to participate - they need to feel seen.

🎵 The New Festival Beat

The result? A cultural remix of the live experience. Less about numbing out, more about tuning in. As the sober-curious movement continues to grow, festivals are becoming more intentional spaces - where people can celebrate on their own terms.

Moderation is no longer a side note. It’s a headliner in its own right.

You Don’t “Have” Fans. You Earn the Relationship.

Fandom is having a moment. Again.

There are endless headlines about the rise of the “new” fan - hyper-engaged, platform-native, born into meme culture and fluent in niche. Reports churn out taxonomies and traits: the Gen Z sports obsessive, the K-pop stan, the streaming superfan. The message is clear: fans are a powerful cohort, and brands need to figure them out.

But here's the problem: most of the conversation still treats fandom like a fixed attribute - a type of person to be targeted, instead of a context-dependent behaviour to be earned.

Let’s be clear: fandom is not a personality type. It’s a response.
It emerges when the right conditions exist - when people find cultural meaning, community, emotional return or creative agency in the worlds they connect with.

Some of those conditions are designed. Others are accidental. But none of them are guaranteed.

Fandom is a system, not a segment

Brands love segmentation: who are these fans, where do they live, what’s their disposable income? Useful in some ways. But it misses the deeper point.

Two people with the same music taste or media habits might engage in wildly different ways depending on what the cultural system around them offers:

• One fan watches passively. Another edits tour footage into narrative arcs with fan theories, inside jokes and timeline canon.

• One buys a jersey. Another crowdfunds a documentary to preserve the club’s grassroots story.

• One streams the album. Another builds a Discord server that outlives the release cycle.

Same interest. Different conditions. Different behaviour.

Fandom is shaped by access, expectation, community design, and the level of creative or emotional input the world around it allows. It’s not a thing people bring. It’s a thing they build - often in response to how a brand, artist or platform sets the tone.

Behaviour > Belonging

Want to understand the future of fandom? Don’t ask “Who are these people?” Ask “What are they able (or invited) to do?”

• Are they given tools to remix and reframe stories?

• Is there frictionless access to the source or mystique to unravel?

• Is it reciprocal, performative, devotional, communal?

• Does the platform enable connection or gatekeep it?

Some of the most successful fandoms didn’t scale because of who the fans were, but because of what the ecosystem allowed:

• The NBA’s growth among Gen Z isn’t about youth appeal alone. It’s about its embrace of player-as-creator culture - from TikTok to League Fits to podcasting.

• Coachella’s branded relevance isn’t rooted in legacy. It’s powered by the annual ritual of fashion, identity play, livestream hype, and digital presence far beyond the desert.

• Dungeons & Dragons’ renaissance didn’t come from rebranding the game. It came from opening the gates, letting players become performers, creators and communities.

Numbers to know

• 63% of Gen Z say they connect more deeply with brands that help them express or create, not just consume (GWI, 2024).

• The top 10% of artist superfans drive over 40% of digital music revenue - not just through streaming, but through ticketing, merch, and premium content (MIDiA Research).

• Fandom-first platforms like Discord, AO3 and Letterboxd are growing faster than social platforms in active engagement metrics year-on-year (WARC, 2024).

So what does this mean for brands?

If you want to build real fandom, stop treating it like a demographic to court.

Instead:

• Design for behaviour. Enable rituals, remixing, self-expression. Create the tools and signals that allow fans to act.

• Respect the tempo. Not all engagement is always-on. Some fandoms thrive on drops, delays, suspense.

• Map the inputs. Fandom isn’t output. It’s what happens when the cultural inputs - intimacy, relevance, recognition - align.

Because you don’t own fandom. You don’t get to define it.
You only get to design the conditions where it can emerge - or not.

Sources:

• GWI “Future of the Creator Economy” Report, 2024

• MIDiA Research: “Superfans & Monetisation” 2023

• WARC: “Fandom Platforms 2024 Benchmark”

AI Hitmakers and Algorithmic Hype: How Tech Took the Wheel in Culture

Meet The Velvet Sundown - a psychedelic rock “band” with over 400,000 monthly listeners on Spotify, two albums released in June, and zero confirmed human members. Their Spotify profile is verified, their bios are gibberish, and their band photos look like they were dreamt up by a machine. That’s because they probably were.

No one asked for an AI psych-rock band. But platforms made space for one. That’s the story.

Streaming services like Deezer report that nearly 20 percent of daily uploads are now fully AI-generated. No disclosure required. Spotify’s algorithms surface tracks based on predictive engagement patterns, not provenance or intent. For most users, that’s invisible. For brands, artists and culture strategists - it’s existential.

What we’re witnessing isn’t just the rise of AI in music. It’s the wider transformation of cultural influence from a human-led ecosystem to a machine-optimised economy. Tech isn’t just the stage anymore. It’s the writer, the producer and - most powerfully - the recommender.

This shift matters. Because for decades, cultural influence came from the margins. It started with subcultures, underground movements, niche tastemakers. But today, cultural moments increasingly start with algorithmic visibility: TikTok virality, FYP formatting, playlist placement.

Generative tools like AI image-makers or text-to-music models might still feel novel - but they’re scaling fast, and so are the incentives to use them. For platforms, synthetic content is cheap, controllable, and doesn’t argue about royalties. For brands chasing ‘always-on’ presence, it's tempting too.

But there’s a cost. When cultural relevance is reduced to performance metrics and recommendation logic, we risk losing the depth, risk-taking and community-first thinking that actually makes culture stick.

For brands and creators that care about legacy, not just visibility, this is the moment to double down on intent. The best strategy now isn’t to ignore tech - it’s to use it critically. To understand how it’s shaping taste and attention, yes - but to invest even harder in human insight, creative bravery and cultural point of view.

Because in this new era, the question isn’t can you scale content with AI. It’s: should you?

And if your brand wants to lead culture - not just fill the feed - you’ll need more than tools. You’ll need taste.

More Than a Game: How Football Foundations Are Rebuilding Community Bonds

Football is often described as a religion, a theatre, a war without weapons. But perhaps most powerfully, it's also a mirror to community. From their inception in shipyards and churches to the sprawling foundations of today, football clubs have always reflected the needs, values, and spirit of the people around them.

Across the UK, every professional club now runs a dedicated foundation - an often-overlooked extension of the club that operates not on matchdays, but every other day that matters. These organisations are not PR vehicles. They’re purpose-built, professional outfits delivering long-term, local impact: from health programmes for over-60s to pathways into employment for young people.

And while the foundations may be relatively new (most were established in the last 30 years), the ethos they embody is anything but. Many of the earliest clubs, including Manchester United and West Ham, were founded as workplace teams promoting physical and mental wellbeing. Others, such as Everton and Southampton, were formed by churches as moral and social outlets, guided by the values of muscular Christianity - a Victorian movement that saw sport as a tool for discipline, inclusion, and upliftment.

That lineage lives on. Celtic and Hibernian were established to serve the Irish working-class diaspora in Glasgow and Edinburgh, respectively. Today, their foundations still carry the baton - funding educational initiatives, delivering anti-racism workshops, and providing free meals in low-income neighbourhoods.

What does this look like in practice?

• Aston Villa Foundation’s ‘Villa Vision’: In partnership with Specsavers, they deliver free eye tests and prescription glasses to pupils in areas with high deprivation, improving classroom confidence and academic performance through better vision.

• Brentford FC Community Sports Trust’s refugee programme: Through football sessions and English classes, the club has created a powerful inclusion initiative for newly arrived refugees, helping them integrate through both play and language.

• Everton in the Community’s ‘Blue Family’: Originally launched during COVID-19, this initiative delivers food parcels, mental health support, and welfare checks to vulnerable fans and families. It's evolved into a permanent community safety net.

• Leeds United Foundation’s ‘Youth Hub’: Working with the Department for Work and Pensions, this hub supports 16 to 24-year-olds on Universal Credit with employability training, CV workshops, and direct access to jobs and apprenticeships.

• Liverpool FC Foundation’s ‘Open Goals’: Free outdoor physical activity sessions across Merseyside parks, aimed at getting families and young people moving, while also subtly embedding mental health check-ins and nutritional advice.

At their best, football foundations are not just reactive, but proactive. They take a holistic approach to wellbeing, recognising that physical health, mental resilience, economic opportunity and social inclusion are all interconnected. And while they may operate independently of club ownership, their success proves that the strength of a football brand is still measured by its social footprint.

Of course, this sits in stark contrast to the realities of modern football economics. Rising ticket prices, billionaire owners, and commercialisation have increasingly alienated local fans. But foundations offer a way back - a reconnection to the game’s roots. They’re a reminder that football is not just a business asset or broadcast product. It’s a civic institution. A shared identity. A cultural glue.

So when we talk about the power of football, it’s not just about what happens in the 90 minutes. It’s about everything that happens beyond them - in classrooms, job centres, food banks and five-a-side pitches. The foundations are proof that while the business of football may have changed, its beating heart remains exactly where it started: with the people.

Protest, Platforms and the Politics of Performance: Who Decides What Belongs on Stage?

This year’s Glastonbury sparked a national conversation far beyond music, with performances by Bob Vylan and Kneecap now under police review and political scrutiny. Their sets included explicit political commentary, chants around the Israel-Palestine conflict, and criticism of political leaders - prompting questions about the role of artists, the responsibilities of broadcasters and festivals, and the place of government in shaping cultural spaces.

🔍 The Case for Responsibility and Oversight

Some argue that with freedom of expression comes responsibility - particularly when messages may be interpreted as inciting violence. When phrases like “Death to the IDF” or “start a riot” are broadcast to thousands, organisers and broadcasters face legitimate questions about where to draw the line. For critics, this isn't about silencing dissent, but about upholding public safety and ensuring platforms aren't used - intentionally or otherwise - to legitimise hate.

With events like Glastonbury carrying global reach, there’s pressure on institutions like the BBC to apply due diligence. Publicly funded organisations have accountability to a diverse audience, and it's argued that they must weigh the potential harm of broadcasting extreme or emotionally charged content without sufficient context.

🎙 The Case for Artistic Freedom and Cultural Space

On the other hand, protest has always had a place in art. Many see performances like these as part of a long tradition of artists using the stage to confront uncomfortable truths, provoke thought, and speak to lived experiences. To investigate or suppress those performances risks criminalising artistic expression and setting dangerous precedents for creative freedom.

Supporters of the artists argue that context matters: punk, satire, character performance and cultural commentary are often provocative by nature. Calls for censorship can flatten the complexity of these performances and disproportionately target marginalised or politically critical voices.

There is also concern around selective outrage - why are some forms of political speech tolerated while others face backlash? And at what point does state involvement in curating cultural content become interference?

🤝 A Shared Challenge

Ultimately, this is a complex issue with no easy answers. Festivals and broadcasters have a responsibility to ensure safe, inclusive spaces, but also to protect artistic expression. Governments, too, must tread carefully - upholding law and public order without encroaching on the creative freedoms that are vital to a healthy, democratic society.

These questions aren’t new, but they are urgent. As the lines between art, protest, and politics become increasingly blurred, institutions, audiences, and artists will need to navigate these tensions with nuance, empathy, and accountability.

🎗️ Amid all of this, it’s important to remember that the conversations sparked on stage reflect a backdrop of real human suffering. Whatever your views, humanitarian aid remains critical in Gaza and across conflict zones. If you’re able, consider donating to relief organisations delivering medical and essential support on the ground.

This is about more than what happens on stage - it’s about how we hold space for culture, conflict, and compassion at the same time.

In a Sea of Silence, Willy Spoke Loud: Fashion as Protest, Not Performance

At a moment when fashion’s biggest stages are filled with fantasy and distraction, Willy Chavarria brought hard reality to the runway. His SS26 show at Paris Fashion Week didn’t entertain. It intervened.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dazed (@dazed)

As the lights came up, models slowly took formation: kneeling, heads shaved, hands behind their backs. Dressed in plain white tees and loose shorts, the cast - some long-time collaborators, some discovered via open call - recreated the pose of those detained by ICE and incarcerated across Latin America. A confronting and deliberate gesture that turned the runway into a space of resistance.

While the fashion industry largely avoided political confrontation this season, Chavarria made the consequences of silence impossible to ignore.

In an era where brands chase “relevance” through aesthetics, virality, and surface-level collaboration, Chavarria reminds us that true relevance is rooted in risk, responsibility, and resonance. You don’t earn cultural capital by riding trends - you earn it by standing for something.

Fashion, at its core, is a language. What we wear can speak volumes. But the industry too often chooses neutrality to protect its bottom line. Chavarria’s show was a powerful counterpoint: a designer using fashion not to escape from the world, but to confront it head-on.

The collection that followed kept the energy tight: boxy tailoring in highlighter pinks and punchy reds, sharp womenswear silhouettes, and American sportswear distorted to exaggerated proportions. A wink to Chavarria’s Ralph Lauren past, but with the volume turned all the way up - and the messaging layered deep.

This was America reimagined. This was fashion politicised. This was a designer at the top of his game, refusing to look away.

In cultural marketing, we talk a lot about belonging, storytelling, and emotional connection. Willy Chavarria lives it.
He doesn’t posture. He positions.
He doesn’t speak for the culture - he speaks from it.

As brands scramble to insert themselves into moments, here’s a masterclass in how to make one.

Because cultural relevance isn’t about proximity to cool.
It’s about proximity to truth.

The Tate’s £150m Endowment: A Bold Step into a New Funding Future

The Tate’s launch of a US-style endowment fund is a significant and symbolic shift in how one of the UK’s leading cultural institutions plans to futureproof itself. The ambition: raise £150 million by 2030. The reality: a £43 million head start, and a new chapter in arts funding strategy that will draw both applause and scrutiny in equal measure.

Here’s a balanced take on why this matters right now - and what it means for the future of UK cultural funding.

Why This Move Is Notable Now

1. Context: Shrinking Public Funding and Economic Headwinds
Arts organisations across the UK have faced sustained financial pressure for over a decade. With static or falling government grant-in-aid and the economic aftershocks of Brexit, Covid-19, and inflation, traditional funding avenues are increasingly under strain. The Tate’s recent operating deficit and 7% staff cuts are just the latest signs.

2. A Strategic Pivot Towards Long-Term Resilience
Unlike annual fundraising campaigns or short-term sponsorship deals, an endowment fund is built for permanence. By drawing only on investment income - not the capital itself - the Tate hopes to create a financial buffer that sustains its artistic and educational output even during periods of economic instability. In principle, this is an investment in generational continuity, not just annual programming.

3. Borrowing from the US Playbook
The Tate is openly inspired by its American counterparts - from MoMA to the Met - where large-scale endowments are standard operating procedure. The difference in the UK is both cultural and structural: British institutions have historically leaned on public funding and corporate partnerships, with philanthropic culture less embedded. The Tate’s shift could help normalise the idea of legacy giving and long-term investment in UK arts infrastructure.

The Pros

• Stability in Uncertain Times: Endowments offer a reliable revenue stream, mitigating reliance on unpredictable grants or market-dependent income.

• Artistic Ambition: Tate’s director Maria Balshaw says the fund will underpin the “bold” programming the institution is known for - from blockbuster exhibitions to long-term curatorial posts.

• Protecting Public Benefit: Supporters can earmark donations for social programmes - like school and family education—helping ensure public access doesn’t erode under financial pressure.

• Signal to Global Donors: With major backers including Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Pérez family already onboard, this puts the Tate in better alignment with international fundraising norms.

The Cons

• Philanthropy ≠ Neutral: Accepting large-scale donations - especially from board members and high-net-worth individuals - always raises questions of influence, optics, and access. Even with an ethics committee in place, the perception of “pay-to-play” can linger.

• Ethical Investment Scrutiny: As noted by fundraising consultants, endowment investments must align with Tate’s environmental commitments. Public trust could be quickly undermined by investments tied to fossil fuels or socially contentious industries.

• Cultural Shift, Not Just Financial: This is more than a funding model - it's a philosophical repositioning. Will it lead to more American-style institutional cultures in the UK, where private donors increasingly shape public cultural narratives?

• Who Gets Left Behind? As large institutions like Tate professionalise and expand their fundraising arms, smaller galleries and regional museums may struggle to compete for the same philanthropic pool.

Final Thoughts

The Tate’s endowment marks a clear and calculated pivot toward long-term sustainability in a volatile cultural economy. It’s a decision grounded in realism, but not without risks. If executed with integrity and transparency, it could inspire a new funding era for UK arts. But it must also be watched closely: who funds culture often shapes culture. The Tate’s next chapter will not just be about money- it will be about power, access, and public trust.

Most Brands Get Fandom Wrong. Here’s Why.

Fandom is having a moment. Again.

There are endless headlines about the rise of the “new” fan - hyper-engaged, platform-native, born into meme culture and fluent in niche. Reports churn out taxonomies and traits: the Gen Z sports obsessive, the K-pop stan, the streaming superfan. The message is clear: fans are a powerful cohort, and brands need to figure them out.

But here's the problem: most of the conversation still treats fandom like a fixed attribute - a type of person to be targeted, instead of a context-dependent behaviour to be earned.

Let’s be clear: fandom is not a personality type. It’s a response.
It emerges when the right conditions exist - when people find cultural meaning, community, emotional return or creative agency in the worlds they connect with.

Some of those conditions are designed. Others are accidental. But none of them are guaranteed.

Fandom is a system, not a segment

Brands love segmentation: who are these fans, where do they live, what’s their disposable income? Useful in some ways. But it misses the deeper point.

Two people with the same music taste or media habits might engage in wildly different ways depending on what the cultural system around them offers:

• One fan watches passively. Another edits tour footage into narrative arcs with fan theories, inside jokes and timeline canon.

• One buys a jersey. Another crowdfunds a documentary to preserve the club’s grassroots story.

• One streams the album. Another builds a Discord server that outlives the release cycle.

Same interest. Different conditions. Different behaviour.

Fandom is shaped by access, expectation, community design, and the level of creative or emotional input the world around it allows. It’s not a thing people bring. It’s a thing they build - often in response to how a brand, artist or platform sets the tone.

Behaviour > Belonging

Want to understand the future of fandom? Don’t ask “Who are these people?” Ask “What are they able (or invited) to do?”

• Are they given tools to remix and reframe stories?

• Is there frictionless access to the source or mystique to unravel?

• Is it reciprocal, performative, devotional, communal?

• Does the platform enable connection or gatekeep it?

Some of the most successful fandoms didn’t scale because of who the fans were, but because of what the ecosystem allowed:

• The NBA’s growth among Gen Z isn’t about youth appeal alone. It’s about its embrace of player-as-creator culture - from TikTok to League Fits to podcasting.

• Coachella’s branded relevance isn’t rooted in legacy. It’s powered by the annual ritual of fashion, identity play, livestream hype, and digital presence far beyond the desert.

• Dungeons & Dragons’ renaissance didn’t come from rebranding the game. It came from opening the gates, letting players become performers, creators and communities.

Numbers to know

• 63% of Gen Z say they connect more deeply with brands that help them express or create, not just consume (GWI, 2024).

• The top 10% of artist superfans drive over 40% of digital music revenue - not just through streaming, but through ticketing, merch, and premium content (MIDiA Research).

• Fandom-first platforms like Discord, AO3 and Letterboxd are growing faster than social platforms in active engagement metrics year-on-year (WARC, 2024).

So what does this mean for brands?

If you want to build real fandom, stop treating it like a demographic to court.

Instead:

• Design for behaviour. Enable rituals, remixing, self-expression. Create the tools and signals that allow fans to act.

• Respect the tempo. Not all engagement is always-on. Some fandoms thrive on drops, delays, suspense.

• Map the inputs. Fandom isn’t output. It’s what happens when the cultural inputs - intimacy, relevance, recognition - align.

Because you don’t own fandom. You don’t get to define it.

You only get to design the conditions where it can emerge - or not.

Sources:

• GWI “Future of the Creator Economy” Report, 2024

• MIDiA Research: “Superfans & Monetisation” 2023

• WARC: “Fandom Platforms 2024 Benchmark”

🕶️ Anna Wintour Steps Aside: The Legacy Behind the Sunglasses

Anna Wintour is stepping back from her role as head of editorial content at American Vogue after more than 35 years at the helm. It’s a cultural inflection point that signals more than a shift in personnel: it closes one of fashion media’s most defining chapters. While she retains her positions as Condé Nast’s chief content officer and global editorial director for Vogue, the move invites reflection on the legacy of a woman who, for four decades, didn’t just shape taste - she engineered the industry.

When Wintour took over as Vogue editor in 1988, the fashion landscape was teetering between tradition and transformation. She didn’t wait for evolution. From that very first cover- Michaela Bercu in a bejewelled Christian Lacroix T-shirt and faded jeans -Wintour made her intention clear: fashion would reflect real life, and the magazine would lead, not follow.

What followed was a cultural reorientation built on bold decisions and game-changing firsts:

• In the early 1990s, she championed the rise of the supermodel, elevating figures like Naomi Campbell and Linda Evangelista to global celebrity.

• In 1998, she launched the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund, a powerful pipeline for nurturing emerging American design talent.

• She was a pioneer of celebrity covers, with Gwyneth Paltrow’s 1999 cover marking a new age of blending Hollywood and high fashion.

• Under her vision, the Met Gala evolved from a niche costume benefit into fashion’s most-watched red carpet event, generating over 1 billion social impressions annually.

• In 2006, her fictional counterpart, The Devil Wears Prada’s Miranda Priestly, entered pop culture, cementing her as a household name.

• She famously put Kim Kardashian and Kanye West on the cover in 2014, a polarising but culturally prescient move that reflected the growing influence of reality and digital celebrities.

• Following the 2020 racial reckoning, she acknowledged Vogue’s failures on diversity and led initiatives to broaden representation across Condé Nast.

• In her global role, she oversaw Condé Nast’s editorial consolidation, transforming Vogue into a unified, international brand with centralised creative direction.

• And in 2024, Vogue launched its first AI-assisted editorial feature, signalling her continued push to adapt legacy media to the tools and tempo of the now.

Wintour’s cool demeanour, trademark bob, and iconic shades became shorthand for editorial authority - but beneath that unmistakable image was an editor who understood the machinery of influence. She knew when fashion needed spectacle, when it needed politics, and when it needed intimacy. She didn’t just report on culture - she commissioned it.

Now, as Vogue U.S. searches for a new editorial head, fashion finds itself in a decentralised, creator-led era. The baton may be passing, but Wintour’s playbook still guides how brands build prestige, how images become moments, and how fashion media holds cultural power.

Anna Wintour didn’t just edit a magazine. She authored the modern fashion system - and her legacy will outlive any masthead.

• Wintour’s exit marks the end of the single-most influential editorial tenure in fashion history.

• Her legacy shaped how fashion, celebrity, and media intersect.

• Her influence built a blueprint for brand-building that still underpins cultural strategy today.

• Anna Wintour oversaw 800+ covers during her time at Vogue, pioneering the shift to celebrity-first editorial.

• The Met Gala, under her curation, now brings in over $15 million in donations annually for the Costume Institute (The Met, 2024).

• 46% of Gen Z say social media is their main source for fashion discovery, versus just 6% citing traditional magazines (McKinsey, 2024).

TikTok Leans Into News as Meta Bows Out: What It Means for Platforms, Publishers and Public Trust

📱 TikTok backs news influencers while Meta backs off - and the implications are cultural as much as strategic.

In a move that signals shifting sands in the digital news ecosystem, TikTok is stepping up its support for news creators on the platform, just as Meta continues to retreat from its role in news dissemination. Axios Media reports that TikTok is not only encouraging news influencers to keep posting but is also offering resources and guidance to help them navigate responsible reporting.

This comes at a time when around half of American TikTok users say they get their news from the platform - a figure that puts TikTok shoulder-to-shoulder with traditional outlets in terms of public influence.

Meanwhile, Meta (parent company of Facebook and Instagram) has doubled down on its distancing from news content. From ending fact-checking partnerships to actively blocking news on its platforms in countries like Canada, Meta is making a deliberate pivot away from being seen as a news source.

So what does this divergence tell us?

Platforms Are Picking Sides in the Information Economy

Meta's retreat reflects a longer-term strategy: reducing liability, appeasing regulators, and shifting focus toward entertainment and creator commerce. News, by contrast, brings risk, complexity, and political scrutiny. Its ROI is harder to prove - and harder to monetise.

TikTok, however, sees opportunity in the vacuum. News creators on the platform range from independent journalists to educators and analysts - often with huge Gen Z and Millennial followings. Their content is short-form, highly visual, and community-driven: tailor-made for TikTok’s algorithm and audience behaviour.

While the platform hasn't gone so far as to create an official "news tab", its behind-the-scenes support for these voices suggests it sees value in becoming a trusted, if unconventional, news source - especially for younger users less likely to visit legacy media sites.

Implications for Brands, Publishers and the Public

1. Brand Strategy:
As audiences increasingly treat social platforms as their front page, brands will need to rethink how they show up in those spaces - not just through ads or branded content, but through credible voices, partnerships with newsfluencers, and value-based storytelling.

2. Publisher Survival:
Legacy media should see TikTok’s move as a call to experiment. The door is open for news outlets willing to meet users where they are - not with clickbait or repurposed headlines, but with platform-native, personality-led reporting that builds community, not just traffic.

3. Public Trust:
The rise of news influencers raises questions around accuracy, accountability, and platform responsibility. TikTok’s approach - supporting but not centrally regulating - could leave room for innovation, but also for misinformation. The next phase will require clearer guardrails to maintain public trust.

In a world where attention is everything, the battle for “newsfluence” is officially on. TikTok isn’t trying to become the new BBC - but it is signalling that it wants to be more than just dance trends and recipes.

And when the world’s biggest social platforms start choosing sides in the future of news, brands, creators and consumers alike need to pay attention.

Because the feed is the new front page - and who curates it matters.

Music Deserves More Than a Moment: Why One-Second Hacks Hurt Culture and Brand Integrity

At the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity - a global stage meant to celebrate creative excellence - a campaign was awarded the industry’s highest honour: a Grand Prix. Its hook? Using one-second snippets of popular songs to trigger recognition, while reportedly dodging music licensing fees.

That headline should make anyone in music and brand marketing sit up.

It did for me. And it clearly did for many others, thanks to Shez Mehra, who highlighted the campaign, and Dave Chase, whose sharp commentary gave this issue the platform it deserves. Their reflections have pushed an uncomfortable but crucial conversation into the mainstream - and it’s one we all need to reckon with.

Because this moment says something deeper about how the industry values culture, and by extension, the creators who build it.

One Second of Sound, a Lifetime of Impact

The campaign’s conceit was clever: one second is just long enough to trigger your brain’s emotional connection to a hit song - and just short enough to (allegedly) avoid paying for it. But while the execution may have been slick, the signal it sent was anything but.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about tearing down the brand or the creatives behind the work. It’s about what we, as an industry, choose to celebrate - and the wider consequences of those choices.

Because if the creative benchmark becomes “how cleverly can you not pay artists?”, we’ve got a serious problem.

Culture Can’t Be Borrowed Without Permission

Music isn’t just a marketing tool. It’s a memory. A movement. A way for brands - especially those in lifestyle spaces like alcohol - to build lasting emotional connections.

But those connections must be earned. Not extracted.

Authentic music partnerships build credibility, loyalty, and resonance. Shortcuts, on the other hand, erode trust - both with creators and with audiences who see through it faster than ever.

In a world where every deck says “authenticity” and “equity”, celebrating a workaround that avoids paying musicians is more than a contradiction. It’s a warning sign.

What Can Brands Do Better?

If you work in brand or campaign strategy - especially in alcohol or FMCG, where music and lifestyle go hand in hand - here are some ways to raise the standard, not lower it:

1. Invest in the Relationship, Not Just the Track

Approach music as a long-term creative partner, not a one-off asset. Think campaigns that build with artists, not just feature them.

2. Don’t Mistake Cleverness for Creativity

Real creativity doesn’t avoid the value chain - it uplifts it. If a tactic feels like a loophole, it probably is.

3. Embed Music Early in the Brief

Don’t retrofit music as a post-production bolt-on. Co-create with artists and rights holders from day one.

4. Measure Cultural Impact, Not Just Efficiency

Ask whether your campaign is building brand legacy - or borrowing from someone else’s.

Advice for Artists Working With Brands

The best partnerships are reciprocal. Here’s how artists and teams can approach brand work with clarity and confidence:

1. Protect Your IP and Story

Even one second of your work has value. Make sure usage rights are clear and fair.

2. Get Involved Creatively

Push to be part of the process - not just the final cut. The more collaborative the partnership, the more authentic the result.

3. Align With Brands That Share Your Values

If a brand wants to licence your sound but not your story, think twice.

4. Know When to Say No

Not every opportunity is worth it. If it feels off, it probably is.

Final Word

This wasn’t just a Cannes case study. It was a test. And it revealed some uncomfortable truths about how we still treat creators in advertising.

So, to Shez Mehra and Dave Chase: thank you for raising the profile of this moment. For reminding the industry that if we truly care about creativity, culture, and equity - we need to prove it.

Let’s stop applauding the workaround and start rewarding the work. Music isn’t a hack. It’s heritage.

Creativity pays off. But only if we pay in.

🌟 Spotlight: Broadway Protest Reclaims the Kennedy Center

Rainbow flags. Rewritten lyrics. A Tony-winning producer. Five senators.
This wasn’t your usual evening at the Kennedy Center - it was political theatre in the most literal sense.

Last week, the storied Washington venue became the site of Love Is Love, a Pride Month Broadway concert that doubled as a pointed protest against President Trump’s recent takeover of the cultural institution. Staged in the Justice Forum, a 144-seat theatre within the Reach expansion, the event featured performances by LGBTQ+ Broadway stars and a closing number that repurposed Les Misérables' “One Day More” into a satirical swipe at the president himself.

Orchestrated by five Democratic senators - including John Hickenlooper, Tammy Baldwin, and Elizabeth Warren - and directed by Hamilton’s lead producer Jeffrey Seller, the concert was both symbolic and strategic: a cultural stand against Trump’s erasure of the Kennedy Center’s progressive legacy.

🎭 Why It Matters

Seller had already cancelled Hamilton’s planned 2026 run at the venue, citing misalignment with Trump’s agenda. This concert was the live-action follow-up: part celebration, part confrontation, and a clear message that artistic spaces are not neutral ground.

“This is our way of reoccupying the Kennedy Center,” Seller said. “We are here, we exist, and you can’t ignore us.”

While Trump and newly appointed Kennedy Center president Richard Grenell attempted to frame the event as a “first annual talent show,” the reality was far more pointed. With performances from Falsettos, The Wild Party, and I Am Harvey Milk, the night embodied queer joy and protest as creative tools.

🏳️‍🌈 Cultural Courage in Real Time

Unlike glossy corporate Pride campaigns, Love Is Love carried weight. It wasn’t a brand stunt or a rainbow overlay. It was a grassroots reclaiming of space at a time when LGBTQ+ representation at the federal level has been quietly stripped back. For artists and allies, this was resistance through repertoire - a defiant act wrapped in song, solidarity, and stagecraft.

Why Brands Should Care

This moment is a reminder that culture is never neutral, and that cultural institutions are battlegrounds for identity, inclusion, and narrative control. For brands that show up around Pride or position themselves as allies, Love Is Love is a case study in action over aesthetics. Visibility is not enough - it has to be meaningful, and sometimes, it has to be loud.

From Merch to Meaning: How Oasis Are Monetising Cultural Nostalgia with adidas and Burberry

Two high-impact collabs, a pop-up store, and a sold-out reunion tour - Oasis are writing the playbook on music-led brand strategy in 2025.

Oasis aren’t just getting back together - they’re cashing in on the cultural capital they built across three decades. As Liam Gallagher gears up to front the Oasis Live ‘25 tour celebrating Definitely Maybe, the band is making strategic moves offstage too, with not one but two brand collaborations: adidas Originals and Burberry.

Both partnerships go beyond standard artist merch - they’re part of a 360° commercial and cultural strategy to monetise nostalgia, drive new revenue streams, and anchor Oasis as a multi-generational brand.

And the smart move? They’ve opened a limited-run Oasis pop-up retail store in Manchester, selling exclusive pieces from the adidas collab alongside music memorabilia and archive content. It’s not just a store — it’s a destination, designed to convert fandom into footfall and sales into story.

Oasis x adidas: Terracewear Meets Timeless Relevance

The “Original Forever” campaign with adidas is a full-circle moment. The collection revives 90s Oasis staples - Firebird tracksuits, bucket hats, coach jackets - for a new generation. But this isn’t just retro flair. It’s a way of hardwiring Oasis into the current Gen Z/Y2K fashion boom, while keeping their roots in terrace culture and Britpop style.

🔗 Watch the promo video:

Available online, in flagship stores, and at live tour venues, the apparel line is embedded directly into the Oasis Live ‘25 experience. For adidas, it strengthens Originals’ long-standing presence in music. For Oasis, it’s a profitable, credible way to align with cultural authenticity - and a fanbase who still see adidas as their generational uniform.

Oasis x Burberry: From Tracksuits to Trench Coats

If adidas is the sound of the people, Burberry brings the polish. Teased via Liam Gallagher’s trench-clad turn in Burberry’s new campaign, this partnership repositions Oasis within a more elevated narrative — still British, still rebellious, but reimagined through luxury tailoring.

🔗 Watch the campaign teaser:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Liam Gallagher Daily (@liamgallagher.daily)

Burberry has been doubling down on its Britishness under Daniel Lee, and Oasis are a strategic fit. Their music defined an era of working-class aspiration and attitude - a mood that fashion now actively seeks out to feel relevant. The collab hints at a creative capsule dropping later this year, with rumours of limited outerwear and exclusive tour-inspired pieces.

The Pop-Up: Turning Fandom into Footfall

Running for a limited time in the band’s hometown of Manchester, the Oasis x adidas pop-up isn’t just a store - it’s a love letter to fandom. Featuring the new collection, rare band archive items, and curated playlists, it bridges commerce and culture. For fans, it’s a pilgrimage. For the band, it’s another layer of monetisation around the reunion moment - direct-to-consumer, high-margin, and fully immersive.

Why This Strategy Matters

This is brand-building through music, not merch. Oasis are showing how legacy artists can use cultural storytelling to reignite commercial fire - especially when aligned with brands who get it. In 2025, nostalgia isn't just sentiment - it's strategy.

Fashion and music partnerships have always made noise, but this model is a masterclass in revenue diversification. It blends emotion and execution. Relevance and retail. And it proves that bands with cultural equity can still convert cool into cash - on their own terms.

⚾ The Dodgers' Million-Dollar Message: Why Brands Must Meet the Moment with Courage and Community

In a move that is both strategic and symbolic, the Los Angeles Dodgers, a franchise deeply embedded in the cultural fabric of Los Angeles, have pledged $1 million in direct financial assistance to families affected by recent ICE raids. This is not merely an act of charity. It marks a defining moment in how brands are expected to engage with the real-world issues impacting their communities.

As a professional working at the intersection of brand marketing and social impact, I see this as a compelling example of what authentic leadership looks like in practice.

Cultural Relevance Is No Longer Optional

Los Angeles is one of the most diverse cities in the world, and the Dodgers are more than just a sports team. They are a community institution. Since the era of Fernandomania in the 1980s, when Mexican-born pitcher Fernando Valenzuela electrified the city, the Dodgers have cultivated a strong connection with their Latino fanbase. In light of this, staying silent on the recent immigration raids would not only have felt out of touch, but would have represented a failure to support the very people who have built the team's legacy.

The Dodgers have chosen to stand with their community when it counts.

This Is Strategy with Substance

Let us be honest. The $1 million pledge is not only a moral decision. It is a savvy move that aligns with the expectations of today’s consumer. Increasingly, Millennials and Gen Z are making purchasing and loyalty decisions based on a brand’s values, not just its products or services.

By acting decisively, the Dodgers are strengthening their identity rather than risking it. They are building deeper loyalty by proving that cultural awareness and social responsibility are part of their core values, not optional extras.

A New Benchmark for Civic Leadership in Sport

In an environment where most professional sports organisations prefer to stay silent on divisive issues, the Dodgers have chosen action. They have not only committed financial support to families in need, but have also taken steps such as denying ICE agents access to the stadium car park. This is a rare example of a club using its physical and social capital to stand up for the community it represents.

Other clubs in Los Angeles, such as LAFC and Angel City FC, have issued supportive statements. But the Dodgers have gone further by converting sentiment into action. That difference matters.

A Lesson for All Brands

This should serve as a clear message to brands across all sectors. Remaining silent in moments of crisis is not a neutral act. Today, consumers expect brands to be engaged, responsive and accountable. That does not mean every brand must comment on every issue, but when your own customers, employees or communities are directly affected, your silence speaks volumes.

The Dodgers have demonstrated that leadership is not about staying comfortable. It is about doing what is right, even when it may be controversial.

Cultural Relevance Takes Time, but Moments Like This Define It

This decision will be remembered well beyond the immediate headlines. It will be remembered by the families receiving aid, by fans across Los Angeles, and by a wider public who are paying attention to which organisations show up when it matters most.

The Dodgers have not just protected their brand. They have advanced it. They have responded with action rather than platitudes, and that is what earns trust in the long term.

In 2025, brand equity is shaped as much by social consciousness as it is by financial performance. True relevance is built over time, but it is moments like these that reveal whether a brand truly understands its role in society.

The question for every brand is no longer whether to respond, but how. When your community looks to you for leadership, will you answer the call?

IMPACT: When the Truth Is Televised: How Documentaries and Dramas Are Becoming Catalysts for Justice

When journalism informs, but storytelling moves, something extraordinary happens: people care. They act. And occasionally, justice follows.

That’s the quiet transformation unfolding on our screens today.

For decades, investigative journalism has been the foundation of public accountability - relentlessly uncovering injustice and shining a light into the darkest corners of power. But in recent years, broadcasters and streaming platforms have taken that legacy and reimagined it. Through emotionally driven dramas and hard-hitting documentaries, they’re not just reporting injustice - they’re immersing us in it.

These stories don’t just explain what happened. They let us feel what it meant. And that’s when things start to change.

Grenfell: Uncovered (Netflix, 2025) & The Tower: Grenfell (BBC, 2023)

“No arrests. Eight years. Two powerful stories. One call for justice.”

In June 2025, Netflix released Grenfell: Uncovered, a blistering documentary marking the eighth anniversary of the fire that killed 72 people in West London. It doesn’t just recount the night of the blaze - it dissects the years of failure that led to it: deregulation, ignored warnings, dangerous materials, and institutional apathy.

Survivors speak. Whistleblowers come forward. Documents surface. The film is unflinching - and it lands like a punch to the national conscience.

Impact after airing:

Sparked widespread national and global media attention.

Gave renewed platform to survivors and campaigners.

Reignited calls for prosecutions of companies and individuals responsible.

Reopened political debate over housing reform and inquiry transparency.

Put pressure on the Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service over delays.

But Grenfell: Uncovered did not emerge in isolation.

In 2023, the BBC aired The Tower: Grenfell - a dramatised mini-series that brought the human side of the story into sharper focus. It offered what a documentary couldn’t: an intimate window into life inside the tower, the confusion of the night itself, and the heartbreak of the aftermath.

Where Netflix presented hard facts, the BBC offered emotional truth. And between them, a full picture began to form.

Impact of The Tower: Grenfell:

Helped the public emotionally connect with the people and experiences behind the headlines.

Ensured Grenfell stayed visible in public memory between phases of the official inquiry.

Used as an educational tool to provoke debate on housing inequality and social neglect.

Amplified calls from justice groups, particularly among younger viewers and educators.

Together, these two projects form a devastating one-two punch: one appeals to the mind, the other to the heart. Both make it painfully clear that Grenfell was not a freak accident - but a preventable outcome of greed, failure, and systemic neglect.

And crucially, both arrive at a time when justice remains stalled. No arrests. No prosecutions. A community still waiting.

Their combined message? We will not forget. And we will not stop asking why no one has been held accountable.

---

Mr Bates vs The Post Office (ITV, 2024)

“A drama so powerful, it rewrote the law.”

This four-part ITV drama told the true story of hundreds of innocent subpostmasters falsely accused of theft, fraud and false accounting - victims of a faulty Horizon computer system and a ruthless institution.

Impact after airing:

Triggered emergency legislation to quash convictions.

Accelerated compensation payments.

Former CEO Paula Vennells returned her CBE amid national backlash.

Prompted new parliamentary investigations.

Widely credited with transforming public understanding of the scandal.

A real-life injustice, long overlooked, was finally seen - because the nation watched, cried, and demanded better.

---

Exposed: The Ghost Train Fire (ABC Australia, 2021)

“A forgotten fire. A reopened wound.”

In 1979, a fire at Sydney’s Luna Park killed seven people. It was declared accidental. Exposed reopened the case with devastating effect—revealing possible arson, institutional failure, and high-level corruption.

Impact after airing:

Calls for renewed criminal investigations.

Reignited national debate about government integrity.

Gave families a long-overdue platform and public support.

It showed that even after decades of silence, the truth can still rise.

---

When They See Us (Netflix, 2019 - resurged post - 2020)

“They were boys. The world called them criminals.”

Ava DuVernay’s dramatisation of the Central Park Five case broke open a painful history of racial injustice and wrongful conviction.

Impact after airing:

Brought global attention to the lives of the exonerated men.

Sparked new conversations around race and justice in U.S. schools and media.

Helped shift public opinion on police and prosecutorial accountability.

A story known to many - but felt by far more after the series aired.

---

Other Stories That Stirred Action

💊 The Pharmacist (Netflix, 2020)

• One man’s quest against opioid abuse laid bare Big Pharma’s role in an American health crisis. It mobilised public concern around accountability in healthcare.

🐟 Seaspiracy (Netflix, 2021)

• Investigated the global fishing industry’s hidden environmental impact. Resulted in widespread scrutiny of “sustainable” labelling practices and conservation claims.

⏳ Time (BBC, 2021)

• Explored the UK prison system with depth and compassion. Used by advocacy groups and policymakers in justice reform conversations.

🏛 Capitol Riot Documentaries (BBC, HBO, 2021–2022)

• Detailed the lead-up and aftermath of the January 6 attack in the U.S. Used in public hearings and reinforced the need for democratic safeguards.

---

The New Power of Storytelling

These films and series do something journalism alone can struggle to do - they translate complexity into compassion, and statistics into stories. They help us not only understand injustice, but feel its urgency. And when people feel, they act.

Streaming platforms and broadcasters aren’t replacing traditional journalism. They’re magnifying it. They’re giving it rhythm, colour, faces, and consequences.

They are, increasingly, a vital part of how justice begins.

And Still, Grenfell

Which brings us back to Grenfell: Uncovered - a documentary airing into a country that still hasn’t delivered justice.

No arrests. No prosecutions. No full accountability.

But now, millions are watching. And when that happens - when truth is finally seen - it becomes harder for power to hide.

Because when storytelling moves us, something extraordinary happens: people care. They act. And occasionally - if we keep the pressure - justice follows.

If you want to get involved and support the ongoing call for justice, visit Justice for Grenfell.

🎉 Why the Notting Hill Carnival Must Be Saved: A Cultural Beacon in Peril

The Notting Hill Carnival is not just an event; it is a vital cultural institution, a living tapestry of history, community resilience, and multicultural celebration. As the largest street festival in Europe - second only to Rio’s Carnival in size - its survival is under serious threat without urgent government funding, a reality brought to light by a recent leaked letter from the carnival’s organisers. But why does this carnival matter so much, and why must it be preserved at all costs?

🌍 A Historical and Cultural Legacy

The roots of the Notting Hill Carnival stretch back to the late 1950s and early 1960s, a period marked by racial tension and social upheaval in London. In 1959, Claudia Jones, a Trinidadian-born activist and journalist, hosted an indoor Caribbean carnival at St Pancras Town Hall. Her event was designed as a joyful response to the racial violence and social exclusion faced by the West Indian community. Jones’s vision planted the seed for what would become the outdoor Notting Hill Carnival, first held in 1966.

That inaugural outdoor carnival was organised by Rhaune Laslett, a community worker committed to bridging divides in a neighborhood scarred by race riots. What began as a modest gathering aimed at local children quickly evolved into a vibrant celebration of Caribbean culture, music, and heritage, drawing hundreds of thousands of revellers over the years.

🎶 Subcultures and Community Spirit

Notting Hill Carnival is a unique cultural melting pot that showcases diverse subcultures within the Caribbean diaspora and beyond. From the pulsating rhythms of calypso, soca, and reggae to the intricate artistry of steelpan bands and flamboyant masquerade costumes, the carnival is a living archive of Caribbean expression.

It is also a space where Afro-Caribbean identities assert their place in British society, creating a sense of belonging and pride. The carnival fosters community cohesion, economic opportunities for local vendors, and a platform for emerging artists and musicians.

📊 The Scale and Significance

The carnival draws approximately 2 million attendees over the August bank holiday weekend, transforming West London into an open-air festival of sound, colour, and life. Last year, nearly 7,000 Metropolitan Police officers were deployed to manage crowd safety and public order.

This scale underscores not just the carnival’s popularity but also its logistical complexity and the critical need for adequate funding and resources to ensure the safety and enjoyment of all participants.

⚠️ The Crisis: Urgent Funding Needed

Despite its immense cultural and economic value, the Notting Hill Carnival is now facing an existential threat. Ian Comfort, the carnival chair, has revealed in a leaked letter to the UK Culture Secretary that urgent government funding is essential to safeguard the event’s future.

An independent safety review highlighted “critical public safety concerns” requiring immediate action, including enhanced stewarding and crowd management. With operational demands escalating and police resources stretched thin, the risk of a “mass casualty event,” as warned by the Met Police’s Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist, is a grave concern.

The carnival’s traditional supporters - the Greater London Authority and local councils - can no longer meet these growing needs alone, placing this iconic cultural institution at serious risk.

❤️ Why Saving Notting Hill Carnival Matters

To lose Notting Hill Carnival would mean more than losing a party. It would mean erasing a vital symbol of Black British culture, community resilience, and multicultural celebration. It would silence a powerful platform for cultural education and identity affirmation.

The carnival also contributes significantly to the local and national economy, supporting hundreds of jobs and small businesses, and drawing tourism revenue.

🚀 Moving Forward: A Call to Action

Protecting Notting Hill Carnival requires immediate and sustained investment from government bodies, alongside community and private sector support. Funding must prioritize safety improvements while preserving the authentic spirit of the event.

This moment is a crossroads. The carnival’s survival is not guaranteed, but with urgent action, it can continue to flourish as a beacon of cultural relevance and communal joy.

The Notting Hill Carnival is far more than a festival - it is a testament to the power of culture to build bridges, celebrate identity, and transform communities. Saving it is not just about preserving a tradition; it is about honoring the past and empowering future generations.

🎤 The Rise of Independent Artists: How 2025’s Music Streaming Landscape Is Changing the Game

The Japanese House (photo credit Max Barnett)

In 2025, the music industry has reached a turning point. Over 50 per cent of all music streamed globally now comes from independent or unsigned artists. This dramatic shift marks the democratisation of music creation and distribution, transforming how we discover, share and enjoy music.

The Democratisation of Music

Major record labels no longer hold the near-monopoly on which artists reach worldwide audiences. Advances in technology, social media and digital distribution platforms have enabled musicians to produce, promote and monetise their work independently. Platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music, SoundCloud and emerging decentralised streaming services provide artists with unprecedented access to listeners around the globe.

Independent artists now enjoy greater creative control, keep a larger share of their earnings and engage directly with their fans. According to a 2024 MIDiA Research report, independent music revenues have grown by 25% annually over the past five years, reaching an estimated $2.5 billion globally in 2024 (MIDiA Research, 2024).

In the UK alone, independent artists accounted for 55% of total streams in the first quarter of 2025 — a milestone that reflects the sector’s rapid growth (BPI, 2025). Globally, over 70% of newly released tracks come from independent artists, a stark contrast to just 30% a decade ago (IFPI, 2024).

Opportunities Abound

For artists, this rise in streaming share means more opportunities to break through without major label backing. Viral hits can come from bedroom producers, indie bands can sustain touring careers and previously underrepresented voices can reach audiences hungry for authentic sounds.

Listeners also benefit from greater variety. In 2025, 65% of music consumers reported discovering new artists through independent music platforms or social media rather than traditional radio or TV (YouGov, 2025). Playlists curated by algorithms or tastemakers feature a broader range of music styles and artists from every corner of the world. Fans feel more connected to creators who are accessible and relatable, encouraging deeper engagement and loyalty.

Challenges to Navigate

However, this transformation brings new challenges. With over 60,000 tracks uploaded daily on streaming platforms, independent artists face intense competition to be heard (Spotify Insights, 2024). Without the marketing budgets of major labels, success often depends on savvy self-promotion, community building and sometimes a touch of luck.

Monetising music remains difficult. Streaming services typically pay between $0.003 and $0.005 per stream, making it hard for independent artists to sustain income through streaming alone (SoundExchange, 2024). Many musicians supplement income through merchandise, live shows, licensing and crowdfunding.

There is also concern about the power of streaming platforms themselves. Algorithms play a key role in determining what music gains exposure, meaning artists must learn to work with these systems or risk being overlooked.

What the Future Holds

This rise in independent music streaming represents a fundamental change in the industry’s power dynamics. Artists and listeners alike benefit from increased choice and control, but success requires adaptability, creativity and entrepreneurial spirit.

As Warner Music Group CEO Max Lousada recently said, “The future of music is diverse, independent and artist-led. The industry must embrace this evolution to thrive.”

In 2025 and beyond, the music industry is no longer dominated by major labels and blockbuster hits. It is about community, innovation and the rich tapestry of voices that make music such a powerful cultural force.

🤖 Cannes Lions 2025: Media Convergence and AI Are Reshaping Brand Strategy

At this year’s Cannes Lions, one panel in particular cut through the noise: The Female Quotient’s FQ Lounge session on media convergence and the future of brand engagement. Leaders from Procter & Gamble, dentsu, LiveRamp, Hilton, Strava and more tackled one of the most urgent shifts in our industry: the collapse of traditional media boundaries and the rise of an AI-powered, data-driven, culturally fluid ecosystem.

The panel didn’t just talk about trends. It addressed a deeper truth: that the way we define media, engage audiences, and measure success has fundamentally changed - and our strategies need to catch up.

Here’s why AI now sits at the heart of this transformation, and what it means for marketers ready to lead, not just follow.

1. Media Has Converged. Now Strategy Must Too.

We’ve moved beyond the era of “channel planning.” Consumers no longer experience media in silos - neither should our strategies. What we’re seeing is a true convergence of traditional, digital, and social touchpoints, with blurred lines between paid, owned, earned, and organic content.

The challenge? While audiences are flowing seamlessly, most brand structures, teams, and data systems aren’t. AI enables us to unify fragmented signals into a coherent view of how people engage. But we must design for convergence—not just tactically, but organisationally and culturally.

2. Master Dashboards Are Only as Good as the Questions We Ask

The panel rightly spotlighted the industry's obsession with the “master dashboard.” But the real power lies not in centralisation - it lies in clarity. In a converged landscape, it’s no longer just about reach or frequency. It’s about understanding interplay: between paid and organic, performance and brand, short-term impact and long-term resonance.

AI allows us to move from passive reporting to active decision-making - surfacing real-time insights that enable marketers to test, iterate and scale quickly with far less wastage. But only if we’re asking the right questions.

3. From Keywords to Conversations: AI and Cultural Relevance

AI is fundamentally changing the creative brief. We’re moving from targeting based on static demographics or keyword-driven intent to dynamic, cultural understanding. Large language models and generative AI allow us to analyse live conversations at scale, anticipate emerging narratives, and craft messaging that resonates before trends go mainstream.

It’s no longer about jumping on the latest meme or hashtag - it’s about understanding the cultural pulse in real time. With AI, brands can stop reacting and start participating meaningfully.

4. Empower People. Don’t Replace Them.

A powerful moment from the panel: the call to bring people with us on the AI journey. There’s still fear - of irrelevance, of replacement, of not keeping up. But the real opportunity lies in using AI to enhance human creativity, not sideline it.

This requires a cultural shift. Teams must be encouraged to experiment, unlearn legacy thinking, and not be afraid to step away from what we’ve always done. AI is a partner in innovation, not a shortcut - and certainly not something to be ashamed of using.

5. Innovation Without Integrity Is a Dead End

As we scale our use of AI and data, we must lead with responsibility. Privacy, transparency and data ethics are not separate from creativity - they are essential to it. The trust we build with our audiences is our greatest asset, and the brands that balance innovation with integrity will be the ones that thrive in the long run.

Yes, we can move fast. But we must also move responsibly.

The Marketer’s New Mandate

The message from Cannes was clear: We’re not just building media plans anymore - we’re shaping ecosystems.

To lead in this converged, AI-accelerated environment, marketers must:

• Design for convergence, not just coordination

• Build agile, data-smart systems that empower decision-making

• Move from keyword targeting to cultural fluency

• Equip teams to see AI as a creative and strategic amplifier

• Lead with data integrity, not just efficiency

The future of brand engagement isn’t defined by platform or placement - it’s defined by our ability to listen deeply, respond intelligently, and engage meaningfully in the moments that matter.

And that future is already here.

Watch the full Female Quotient panel here:

European Football Breaks €38 Billion Barrier - But Can the Game Keep Its Soul?

European football has surged past a major financial milestone. According to Deloitte’s newly released 2025 Annual Review of Football Finance, the continent’s football industry generated a record-breaking €38 billion (£32.2bn) in revenue during the 2023/24 season, reflecting an 8 percent year-on-year increase.

But that growth pales in comparison to what is happening in the women’s game. The Women’s Super League (WSL) recorded a 34 percent rise in revenue, with every club surpassing £1 million for the first time. That is over four times the growth rate of the men’s game, highlighting women’s football as one of the fastest-growing segments in global sport.

⚽ Key Statistics Driving Football’s Future:

• €38 billion: Total revenue generated by the European football market in 2023/24 (+8 percent YoY)

• Over €20 billion: Combined revenue from the 'Big Five' leagues (Premier League, Bundesliga, LaLiga, Serie A and Ligue 1), passed for the first time

• More than £2 billion: Premier League clubs’ commercial revenue reached a record high

• £1 billion: Championship clubs’ total revenue, up 28 percent, driven by club mix and broadcast income

• £1 million or more: Revenue reported by every Women’s Super League club (+34 percent YoY)

📈 Growth Meets Identity: A Cultural Crossroads

These figures tell a story beyond business performance. They signal that football is not only thriving financially but undergoing a cultural transformation. As clubs attract greater investment and build international fanbases, there is an urgent need to protect their roles as community institutions.

Football clubs are part of the social fabric. They represent history, identity and belonging. As Timothy Bridge of Deloitte emphasises, they must be treated as community assets, not just commercial entities.

The test ahead is clear: clubs must pursue commercial growth while maintaining authenticity and supporting the fans who have sustained them for generations.

🚀 Women’s Football: A Game-Changer in Every Sense

The standout story in the Deloitte report is the WSL’s 34 percent growth. Compared to the 8 percent growth of the overall European football market, it is a remarkable signal of momentum.

This surge reflects more than revenue. It speaks to cultural change. The women's game is now attracting major sponsors, growing broadcast audiences and inspiring a new generation of players and fans.

Women's football is no longer developing in the shadows of the men's game - it is carving its own path, with a distinct identity and increasing commercial value. The numbers show it, but the movement behind them is even more powerful.

🧭 Looking Ahead: Growth With Purpose

European football is thriving, but its long-term success depends on how that growth is managed. Commercial momentum must not come at the cost of local relevance, affordable access or the spirit of the sport.

Sustainable investment should focus on:

• Grassroots and youth development

• Fair distribution of resources

• Growing women’s football equitably

• Safeguarding supporter engagement and club culture

⚖️ Final Word

Football’s record-breaking revenues in 2023/24 reflect its global pull. But the true strength of the sport lies in its ability to unite, to inspire and to reflect society. If the next chapter in football’s evolution is to be successful, it must be written with integrity, inclusivity and cultural awareness.

Protecting the Beat: Why AFEM’s AI Principles Could Shape the Future of Music Creation

The music industry stands at a critical crossroads. The rise of generative AI is transforming how music is made, distributed, and consumed - but not without raising urgent questions about creators’ rights, ethics, and fair compensation. Enter AFEM (Association For Electronic Music), an influential voice in the electronic music scene, which has just released a pioneering set of AI Principles aimed at protecting music creators in this rapidly evolving landscape.

The Cultural Stakes Are High

Music is not just a product; it’s a cultural lifeblood. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) reported that global recorded music revenues hit $31.1 billion in 2023, driven by streaming and digital innovation. But as AI technologies like generative models proliferate, artists and producers fear losing control over their creative output. According to a recent survey by MIDiA Research, 65% of music creators are concerned that AI could exploit their work without fair recognition or pay.

AFEM’s move reflects a growing alarm among creators worldwide. Its new principles demand that AI developers seek “explicit authorisation” from rightsholders before using copyrighted music to train their models. This insistence is crucial because, as AFEM warns, existing industry contracts were never designed with AI in mind - leaving a legal grey zone ripe for exploitation.

Why This Matters: Rights, Recognition, and Revenue

AFEM’s principles aren’t just about protecting revenue streams; they emphasise creators’ moral rights - the personal connection artists have with their work. Even when labels or publishers hold rights, AFEM stresses that “authors and performers must approve or decline AI uses”, safeguarding artistic integrity in a world where AI can generate “new” content based on original works.

The economic impact of ignoring these protections could be staggering. A 2024 report by Goldman Sachs predicted that AI-generated music could disrupt $5 billion in royalties annually by 2030 if left unregulated, siphoning income away from the very people who fuel the industry’s creativity.

Setting a New Standard

AFEM’s principles join a chorus of industry leaders - including UMG, GEMA, and the Human Artistry Campaign - calling for transparent, fair, and ethical AI use. By prioritising creators rather than just rightsholders, AFEM is pushing for a more inclusive and equitable framework, one that balances technological innovation with cultural preservation.

As AFEM co-chair Kurosh Nasseri put it, “By formulating a simple set of core principles... we will create the environment in which this new technology can flourish without violating the rights of creators and rightsholders.”

Looking Ahead: The Future of Music and AI

With generative AI already responsible for creating over 10% of new music tracks in some streaming playlists (source: MIDiA Research), the music industry’s response to AI’s rise will set a precedent for creative industries worldwide. AFEM’s initiative offers a blueprint not only for safeguarding music creators but also for ensuring AI innovation respects and uplifts human artistry.

The challenge? Aligning fast-moving tech development with the slower rhythms of legal and ethical frameworks - and making sure that, in the rush to embrace AI’s potential, the heartbeat of music’s creators remains front and center.

🎧 AFEM’s AI Principles – Key Takeaways:

1. Explicit Authorisation Required
   AI developers must obtain clear, explicit permission from rightsholders before using copyrighted music for AI training.

2. Fair Compensation and Transparent Credit
   Creators and rightsholders must be fairly compensated and properly credited when their work is used in AI systems.

3. Contracts Must Be AI-Specific
   Existing music industry agreements do not automatically cover AI use. Labels, publishers and distributors must include AI-specific clauses in new contracts to ensure proper authorisation and remuneration.

4. Creators Retain Moral and Usage Rights
   Even when recordings and compositions are owned by labels or publishers, moral rights remain with the creators.
   Authors and performers must approve or decline any AI use of their work.

5. Rights Cannot Be Assumed or Implied
   It must not be assumed that existing contracts or ownership imply consent for AI training or generative outputs.

These principles are designed to set ethical boundaries for AI in music and ensure that creators remain at the centre of innovation, ownership and cultural value.

This post was following Stuart Dredge’s article on music:)ally here

Sources:

• IFPI Global Music Report 2024

• MIDiA Research, Music Creators and AI Survey 2024

• Goldman Sachs, AI and Music Industry Report 2024

• AFEM AI Principles Announcement, June 2025