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”

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.

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.

🧠 Bose Puts Paid Search Under the Microscope: Are Brand Terms Really Worth the Spend?

At the 2025 Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, Bose CMO Jim Mollica made headlines with a deceptively simple but industry-shaking question:

“How incremental is paid Google Search, particularly for branded terms?”

To find out, Bose has done what few major brands dare to do - it has paused its paid search activity in half of its U.S. markets. The aim? To determine whether paid ads on brand-related queries like “Bose Ultra Open Earbuds” are genuinely driving incremental sales, or simply claiming credit for purchases that were going to happen anyway.

This isn't just a strategic test - it’s a challenge to one of digital marketing’s longest-standing assumptions.

Brand Search vs. Generic Search: Understanding Intent

Mollica articulated a point many performance marketers acknowledge privately but rarely act on publicly: not all search traffic is equally valuable.

• A generic search like “headphones” reflects a consumer in discovery mode — open to influence, comparison and brand persuasion.

• A branded search like “Bose QuietComfort Ultra”, however, often signals that a consumer has already made up their mind.

Paid search tends to perform well on paper in both cases. But in the latter, it may simply intercept intent that organic results or direct navigation would have captured anyway.

And this is a broader industry issue. According to a 2023 study by the UK’s Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA), up to 40% of paid search clicks on brand terms are “non-incremental” - meaning they do not drive new business, only accelerate or claim credit for what would have occurred organically.

Similarly, Analytic Partners reported in their ROI Genome 2024 findings that generic search delivers 2–3 times the ROI of branded search on average, precisely because it reaches consumers higher in the funnel.

A Data-Driven Reckoning for Digital Attribution

The marketing industry’s dependency on last-click attribution models has long been under scrutiny. These models disproportionately credit the final interaction before purchase - often a brand’s own paid ad - without recognising the influence of prior brand-building efforts, social content, or even physical retail exposure.

Mollica’s move to pause search activity is a rare real-world holdout test at scale - a true A/B comparison across markets. It’s the sort of experiment that could finally put hard numbers to long-standing assumptions.

Bose also plans to build an AI-powered incrementality model, combining search data, conversion patterns and offline signals to understand which types of search spend genuinely move the needle.

Marketing Efficiency in a Post-Performance Era

As marketing budgets come under increasing scrutiny, this type of experimentation could soon become the norm.

• A 2024 Gartner survey found that 74% of CMOs feel pressured to prove ROI more clearly across all digital channels, with paid search under particular examination.

• Despite this, nearly 65% of paid search budgets in the U.S. go toward branded terms, according to Tinuiti’s Q1 2025 Performance Benchmark Report.

If Bose’s test validates Mollica’s hypothesis, it may open the door for a widespread shift in paid media investment — prioritising discovery-based search and upper-funnel brand marketing over what Mollica describes as "advertising to people already in line to pay."

The Implications: Courage, Clarity and Calibration

By asking a provocative but data-led question — and backing it with a meaningful test - Bose is doing what more brands should: questioning the efficiency of entrenched practices. In a digital ecosystem flooded with dashboards and attribution models, true marketing intelligence comes not from more data, but from better-designed experiments.

For marketers, this is a wake-up call: it may be time to stop paying for the illusion of performance and start investing in actual impact.

Final Thought

As the Bose experiment unfolds, the results could redefine how brands worldwide view search investment - especially in an era where every marketing pound must pull its weight.

Sometimes, progress in marketing doesn’t come from adding more tech or spend - but from pausing, observing, and asking the uncomfortable question:

“What if we’ve been measuring it all wrong?”

🎉 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.

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

What Club Culture Can Teach Brand Strategy in 2025

In a world where brands fight for fleeting attention, club culture continues to offer something that’s rare and enduring: meaningful connection, community, and cultural momentum.

This year’s IMS Ibiza summit wasn’t just a gathering of the global electronic music elite - it was a window into the systems, tensions and opportunities shaping how culture is made, shared, and sustained in 2025. And if you’re building brands in fashion, sport, music or media, you’d be wise to take notes from the dancefloor.

Here are five critical lessons for strategists, brand builders and cultural thinkers right now - powered by data, and informed by the subcultures still setting the global tone.

1. The Global South isn’t the ‘next frontier’ - it’s the current epicentre

According to the 2025 IMS Business Report, 80% of new music streaming subscribers in 2024 came from the Global South. That’s not a forecast - that’s a shift. From amapiano in Lagos to techno collectives in Mumbai, the cultural centre of gravity is moving.

Brands that continue to prioritise legacy markets while overlooking local scenes in Nairobi, Bogotá or Karachi are missing both influence and opportunity. These aren’t “emerging audiences” - they’re defining the pulse of global youth culture in real time.

✴️ Strategic takeaway: Your next breakthrough moment might come from a place you’ve never pitch-decked.

2. Human creativity is still the algorithm’s beating heart

AI is changing the way music is made and marketed - but not always for the better. Rights organisations like GEMA are already in legal battles over AI models scraping millions of tracks without compensation, and lawyers at IMS warned of AI being used as a "revenue substitution" that sidelines artists entirely.

Here’s the kicker: AI only evolves by learning from human creativity. If we hollow out that creative well, what’s left is a loop of mimicry. Artistic labour must be protected - not just morally, but to keep the machine running.

✴️ Strategic takeaway: Value creators before code. Audiences feel the difference.

3. Subculture still drives style, sound - and spend

Genres like Jungle and Drum ’n’ Bass have outlived many of their mainstream critics. Why? Because they’re rooted in community, adaptability and legacy. These scenes aren’t chasing relevance—they’re renewing it through intergenerational exchange.

At IMS, SHERELLE and DJ Flight spoke about how older and younger artists trade influence, not just spotlight. It’s a reminder that longevity in culture comes from stewardship, not speed.

✴️ Strategic takeaway: Want to build lasting relevance? Nurture a cultural continuum - not just a moment.

4. Curation isn’t dead - but it is under threat

There’s a quiet crisis brewing: algorithmic dominance is eroding trust in taste. TikTok virality might land a track in the charts, but as Hospital Records’ Chris Goss put it, “some young artists are getting signed off the back of 30-second clips who’ve never finished a full record.”

The collapse of music press, editorial platforms and local tastemakers has left a void - one the algorithm is only too happy to fill. But audiences still crave voices they trust, not just trends they’re fed.

✴️ Strategic takeaway: Curation is now a competitive edge. Champion distinct taste over mass optimisation.

5. The future of nightlife starts with who’s allowed in

While club culture was born in queer, Black and trans communities, not all dancefloors are the safe spaces they claim to be. Trans artists face real threats globally - some have been detained simply for performing. And back home, marginalised voices are still being pushed to the periphery.

At IMS, the message was clear: diversity is not an aesthetic - it’s a structural necessity. Brands, agencies, and platforms must do more than posture. They need to create real access, redistribute opportunity, and protect the cultural innovators they profit from.

✴️ Strategic takeaway: Inclusion isn’t a campaign - it’s the baseline for cultural credibility in 2025.

Final thought: The dancefloor is still a signal

Culture doesn’t just trickle down from Silicon Valley or Soho House. It loops, samples, remixes and travels fast through unexpected channels. Club culture continues to be a testing ground for global influence, emotional resonance, and creative agility.

If you want your brand to feel alive, relevant and future-facing? Look where the basslines are. There’s a strategy in every sound system.

—

This is On The Record: analysis for brands that move at the speed of culture.

🌀 To read more about the stories behind these insights, explore the full IMS Ibiza 2025 summary here.

A Homage To Brian Wilson: The Sonic Architect Who Rewired American Culture

Brian Wilson wasn’t just a genius. He was a disruptor, a quiet revolutionary who remade pop music from the inside out. His passing at 82 closes a chapter on one of the most profound cultural legacies of the 20th century, and his fingerprints are still all over the sound of today.

Before Brian Wilson, pop was catchy. After Brian Wilson, pop was cathedral. He took the California dream - surfing, convertibles, golden-hour innocence - and turned it into a widescreen, Technicolor sound that reshaped how America saw itself. He didn’t just soundtrack the sixties. He mythologised it, then deconstructed it. And when the illusion cracked, he gave us music that looked straight into the void and still somehow offered grace.

Wilson’s Beach Boys weren’t just hitmakers. They were cultural architects. "Pet Sounds" didn’t just inspire Sgt. Pepper. It provoked it. The Beatles weren’t competing with anyone except Brian. Paul McCartney has called “God Only Knows” the greatest song ever written. That’s not a compliment. That’s acknowledgment of Wilson as a generational force, someone whose instincts changed the very vocabulary of pop.

He bent the studio to his will long before that was even a concept. Long before hip-hop producers were layering samples or indie bands were chasing lo-fi transcendence, Brian was wiring harpsichords, dogs barking, and bicycle bells into heartbreak anthems. He built songs like film scores. “Good Vibrations” wasn’t a single. It was a six-month sonic experiment that accidentally became a number one hit. He made emotion into architecture.

And his influence wasn’t just musical. It was spiritual. Wilson cracked open the pop star archetype. He was a frontman who didn’t tour, a genius who couldn’t always function, a legend who often didn’t want the spotlight. He showed the cost of genius and the beauty in vulnerability. He was decades ahead of the conversation on mental health and the toll of fame. In a world now obsessed with authenticity, Wilson was the original unfiltered soul.

You can hear his echo everywhere. In the rich melancholy of Frank Ocean. In the layered optimism of Vampire Weekend. In the cinematic reach of Tame Impala. Every artist trying to push pop past its limits owes something to Wilson’s experiments, whether they know it or not.

His life was complicated. His journey was brutal. But he came through it all still chasing beauty. Still trying to tune into something divine. That’s what made him matter. Not just the hits. Not just the accolades. But the risk. The fact that he never stopped searching for something pure in a world that wasn’t.

Brian Wilson didn’t just change music. He changed what music could mean. And for that, he’ll always be more than a Beach Boy. He’ll be a blueprint.

God only knows what we’d be without him. But thankfully, we’ll never have to find out.

Navigating Cultural Influence and Free Expression: The Kneecap Controversy and the Role of Industry Leadership

As the 2025 festival season unfolds, one question captures attention in the music world: Will Irish rap group Kneecap perform at Glastonbury as planned? And if so, will the BBC stream their set as in previous years, or will external pressures impact their visibility?

This situation offers a valuable lens on how culture, politics, and industry power intersect - and raises important questions about transparency, influence, and artistic freedom.

Behind Closed Doors: The Private Campaign

Recently revealed correspondence shows a confidential letter sent to Glastonbury organisers by a coalition of senior industry insiders. The letter expressed concerns that Kneecap’s politically charged lyrics could be construed as “propagating hate,” suggesting that their appearance might conflict with commitments to “free speech.”

Those involved are not marginal figures; they represent major agencies, record labels, and organisations with influence across the global entertainment sector. Their participation in this private effort highlights how internal industry mechanisms can shape public cultural spaces - often without scrutiny or accountability.

The Challenge of Private Influence

What stands out is the private, non-transparent nature of this intervention. Rather than a public discussion or open dialogue, the letter functioned as a discreet warning - an attempt to influence decisions away from public scrutiny.

This pattern is not isolated to music; similar private pressures have been reported within fashion and other cultural sectors, reflecting a broader trend of behind-the-scenes lobbying that risks limiting diverse voices without accountability.

Ethical Reflections on Industry Leadership

The entertainment industry rightly prides itself on promoting inclusivity and combating discrimination. However, when leaders in this space engage in efforts to restrict political expression - particularly on complex issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - it raises important questions about the boundaries of institutional anti-racism.

The attempt to silence an Irish group critical of ongoing conflict in Gaza - especially amid a growing public demand for honest political engagement - risks alienating younger artists and audiences who expect cultural platforms to support open discourse.

What’s at Stake for Festivals and Broadcasters?

Glastonbury faces a critical choice: to uphold its reputation as a space for bold, diverse artistic voices, or to yield to pressures that may stifle important cultural conversations. Similarly, the BBC’s decision on streaming Kneecap’s set will be a key indicator of its commitment to editorial independence.

Should mainstream platforms step back, independent channels and artists may need to take up the mantle - ensuring that cultural spaces remain accessible to varied perspectives, even when those perspectives challenge prevailing narratives.

Conclusion: Towards a Culture of Openness and Accountability

The Kneecap controversy highlights broader tensions around political expression, cultural influence, and the responsibilities of industry leaders. As the arts continue to engage with pressing global issues, transparency and accountability must guide how decisions are made.

Balancing respect for diverse viewpoints with a commitment to free expression is no easy task - but it is essential for nurturing a vibrant, inclusive cultural landscape.

SXSW London: A Missed Opportunity That Must Do Better Next Time

Plenty of people have been asking: does the UK really need SXSW London? One comment I came across recently summed it up bluntly - why pay £1,560 for a delegate pass when we already have a thriving ecosystem of homegrown showcase events like The Great Escape, Sound City, FOCUS Wales, Wide Days, ILMC, Chris Carey’s FFWD, and the important work being done by Dr. Yasin El Ashrafi in Leicester?

That stuck with me, and I have to say - I didn’t attend SXSW London. Not because I didn’t want to be curious, but because I genuinely didn’t feel the offering justified the price or the time investment. And based on the programming, reviews, speaker lineups, social media feedback, and media coverage I’ve since seen, I’m confident I made the right call.

Safe, Sanitised, and Superficial

The programming, on paper, felt like it was built for browsing, not building. Most sessions were short - around 30 minutes - with overstuffed panels and no room for actual dialogue. The tone seemed more suited to a stream of corporate keynotes than a space for meaningful cultural exchange. In an era where creative industries are under immense pressure, SXSW London missed an opportunity to go deep, take risks, and speak to the realities of the moment.

Uninspired and Over-Engineered

From what I’ve seen and read, the speaker lineup lacked edge. The event seemed to play it safe - choosing recognisable, brand-friendly names over people actually moving the needle creatively. The result? Sessions that read like a LinkedIn feed brought to life: polished, shallow, and largely forgettable.

Politics Over People

One of the most talked-about aspects was the unannounced appearance of Tony Blair and David Cameron. That decision prompted backlash and led to some artists withdrawing in protest. The term “artwashing” was used for good reason - injecting politics without transparency felt misjudged and undermined any sense of community trust or cultural authenticity.

Branded Vibes, Not Cultural Pulse

Visually, the event looked slick - but many attendees commented that it felt like a branded trade show rather than a genuine celebration of culture. It leaned heavily into commercial polish, yet struggled to capture real creative energy. Even the freebies - like mini branded speakers - felt symbolic of the disconnect between branding and value.

The Elephant in the Room: The Price Point

Let’s not ignore this: £1,560 for a delegate pass is not just steep, it’s exclusionary. Especially when freelancers, small organisations, and emerging artists are already stretched. Multiple people have pointed out how unsustainable this is. I wouldn’t be surprised if next year sees an influx of complimentary passes just to get the right crowd in the room.

What SXSW London Needs To Do Next Time

1. Earn the Right to Be Here
   Engage with the creative communities already thriving across the UK. Don’t impose - collaborate.

2. Lower the Price Point - Dramatically
   If you claim to value accessibility, make it real. This isn’t Silicon Valley.

3. Rebuild Credibility
   Avoid political PR stunts. Prioritise integrity and transparency.

4. Create Space for Real Dialogue
   Slow the format down. Allow time for meaningful conversation, not just soundbites.

5. Centre UK Creativity
   SXSW London has to reflect UK-specific voices, challenges, and strengths. Otherwise, it’s just SXSW-lite.

Bottom line: Even from a distance, the debut of SXSW London seemed to miss its moment. There’s no denying the infrastructure was solid, but the substance felt hollow. If it’s going to earn its place in the UK’s cultural landscape, it needs to be rethought from the ground up - with humility, fairness, and a genuine commitment to the creative communities it claims to serve.

Until then, we already have better options.

🗞️ For more thoughtful analysis on culture, fashion, music, sport, and brand strategy, checkout the rest of the articles from On The Record here: https://www.vickybeercock.work/on-the-record

And subscribe to the Linkedin newsletter On The Record here: https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7339260441459654657/

You can check out the industry reaction in the comments of my Linkedin post here:

A High Court Ruling with High Stakes: What the Brockwell Park Verdict and The Leadmill Closure Mean for the Future of UK Live Music

This past week, the UK’s live music industry received a double gut punch, one from a courtroom in London and the other from Sheffield’s most storied stage.

First, a High Court ruling sided with campaigners who challenged Lambeth Council’s use of Brockwell Park for major music festivals like Mighty Hoopla. The judge determined the council had overstepped planning limits, placing the future of large-scale live events in the park in jeopardy.

Then came the heartbreaking news from Sheffield. The Leadmill, an independent venue that has been a cultural cornerstone since 1980, lost its appeal against eviction. Despite widespread public support, the Court of Appeal refused to intervene, meaning the venue must vacate its building within three months.

These two moments, while seemingly disconnected, paint a sobering picture of a fragile cultural landscape under siege.

A Fragile Ecosystem in Crisis

The UK’s live music ecosystem is one of the most dynamic and influential in the world. It is a sector that contributed £1.6 billion to the UK economy in 2022 (UK Music), supported tens of thousands of jobs, and helped define the global careers of countless artists, from Adele to Arctic Monkeys.

Yet behind the scenes, it is an ecosystem stretched to its breaking point:

• One grassroots music venue is closing every week (Music Venue Trust)

• Festivals are battling rising costs, shrinking margins, and legal uncertainty

• Independent promoters and cultural producers are being squeezed out by commercial landlords and overregulation

• Artists and freelancers are navigating a post-COVID environment with fewer opportunities, less funding, and less security

The closure of The Leadmill is emblematic of the deeper crisis. For over 40 years, it was not just a venue, it was a launchpad. Coldplay, Pulp, Oasis, The Stone Roses, all passed through its doors. Its eviction signals a broader threat: that independent culture can be bought out, locked up, and copied by landlords, with no legal protection for the spirit that made it iconic in the first place.

The venue now faces over 70 job losses, along with the loss of a vital piece of Sheffield’s cultural identity.

Festivals Under Fire, Culture Under Threat

Meanwhile, the Brockwell Park case highlights the delicate legal frameworks that now govern public cultural life. The ruling, which found that Lambeth Council had exceeded its powers by permitting the park’s use for more than 28 days without proper planning consent, may appear procedural. But its implications are profound.

If replicated across other councils and parks, this decision could destabilize summer festival programming across the UK. Festivals like Mighty Hoopla do not just entertain. They draw hundreds of thousands of visitors, support hospitality, boost local businesses, and provide critical stages for emerging artists.

The Protect Brockwell Park group insists it is not "anti-festival," a position that underscores the need for better dialogue, not deeper division. This is not a binary choice between green spaces and live events. It is a policy vacuum where culture is being sidelined because infrastructure, permissions, and protections have not kept up with modern needs.

Of course, the concerns of local residents must be taken seriously. The impact of large-scale events on parks and neighbourhoods cannot be ignored, and communities deserve a say in how their public spaces are used. But this should not be framed as a battle between culture and community. Many festivals have strong local roots, employ residents, and actively reinvest in the areas where they take place. With thoughtful planning, clear communication, and responsive infrastructure, live events and local communities can absolutely coexist. Blanket legal rulings that threaten to shut down entire cultural ecosystems risk doing far more harm than good. What we need is a smarter, more collaborative approach; one that values both community wellbeing and the enormous cultural and economic value these events bring.

We Need a Smarter Approach

This is not about nostalgia or sentimentality. It is about rethinking how we value and govern culture in the UK.

If we want to protect the future of live music, along with the jobs, identities, and economies it supports, we need:

• New planning frameworks that recognise recurring festivals as cultural infrastructure

• Tenant protections for long-standing venues like The Leadmill

• Sustainability guidelines that balance environmental concerns with cultural access

• Community engagement strategies that empower residents without erasing events

• Government support and cultural investment that treats live music as an economic and social asset, not a luxury

Not the End, But a Turning Point

The Leadmill has vowed to continue its legacy elsewhere. Brockwell Park may still host events, but under new scrutiny. These moments, though painful, can also be pivotal.

This is a call to action for policymakers, local authorities, landlords, artists, and audiences alike. Live music is part of the UK’s DNA, but it will not survive unless we start showing up for it, not just with applause but with policies, protections, and purpose.

Because when the stages go silent, the silence echoes far beyond the music.

Beyond Branding: adidas Originals, Abbey Road & Factory International Redefine Access in Music

In the world of creative collaborations, some partnerships go beyond the traditional, pushing boundaries to reshape industries. The new adidas Originals Recording Studio in Manchester, designed in partnership with Abbey Road Studios and Factory International, is a perfect example of this type of cultural intervention. This isn’t just a branding exercise; it’s a reimagining of what music access and creative infrastructure can look like in the modern age.

A Studio with Substance

When we think of world-class studios, Abbey Road is almost synonymous with music history. Known for shaping the sound of countless legends, its involvement in this Manchester project isn’t just a co-sign; it’s a stamp of excellence. The idea of bringing Abbey Road’s engineering expertise into a space designed for the next generation of artists is a game-changer.

But it’s not just about the technical capabilities; it’s about creating an environment where rising talent can flourish. The new studio will offer expert-led sessions with Abbey Road engineers, providing hands-on learning and mentorship that most emerging artists only dream of. This is a space where the craft of music-making meets real-world experience, creating opportunities that are often inaccessible to the underrepresented talent who need them most.

Why Manchester Matters

While London has traditionally been the creative epicentre of the UK, Manchester has always had a rich and distinct musical identity. From the iconic Factory Records to the pulsating energy of The Haçienda and beyond, the city’s impact on global music culture cannot be overstated.

By situating this world-class studio within Co-op Live, the UK’s largest arena, adidas Originals, Abbey Road, and Factory International are not just creating a studio, they’re putting it at the heart of a cultural movement. And perhaps most importantly, they’re doing so in Manchester, a city known for its cultural vibrancy but often overlooked in terms of investment in creative infrastructure.

This strategic location decentralises access and levels the playing field, ensuring that artists don’t have to move to London or other major cities to get the exposure or resources they need. It’s a bold step toward empowering artists right where they are.

Built by Giants, Designed for Underdogs

The involvement of Factory International, a key player in the UK’s cultural landscape, further strengthens the project’s authenticity. Known for their commitment to progressive arts and culture, Factory International has long been at the forefront of bringing new ideas and new voices into the public consciousness. Their participation ensures that this studio isn’t just a state-of-the-art facility, it’s a space with vision, one that understands the importance of creative access and cultural empowerment.

This isn’t a place just for established stars; it’s for the underdogs, the emerging talents who are often sidelined by the mainstream industry. With the backing of adidas Originals, a brand known for amplifying creativity, this studio offers the tools, mentorship, and space that many artists would otherwise be excluded from.

Beyond the Studio

The adidas Originals Recording Studio is a prime example of how brands and cultural institutions are evolving. It’s no longer enough to just throw up a logo and call it a day. True cultural relevance requires action, and this collaboration is an investment in the future, not just in music, but in the creative community at large.

This studio will serve as a platform for underrepresented talent, offering them the chance to grow in a safe, state-of-the-art space. It’s not just about creating music; it’s about opening doors to new opportunities, collaborations, and industries. It’s a space for learning, experimenting, and thriving.

This project also highlights a larger trend in the industry: brands and cultural institutions that are serious about cultural equity and access will stand the test of time. This isn’t a one-off; it’s part of a shift toward building lasting cultural infrastructure that benefits everyone, not just a privileged few.

Final Thoughts

The adidas Originals Recording Studio in Manchester is much more than a new creative space; it’s a reflection of a growing movement within the music industry to democratise access to world-class resources. By partnering with Abbey Road and Factory International, adidas Originals is doing more than selling a product, they’re fostering a community.

In a landscape where so many aspiring artists struggle to break through, this collaboration offers a rare opportunity for mentorship, exposure, and growth. It challenges the traditional dynamics of the music industry, creating a new model for what creative spaces can, and should, look like. This is about more than branding. It’s about building a legacy.

And it all starts in Manchester.

The Great Escape 2025: A Comeback Year, A Cultural Constant

Each May, The Great Escape turns Brighton into something electric; a seaside labyrinth of sound, sweat, discovery, and endless dashes between tiny venues. As someone who worked closely on this festival during my time at MAMA Group, I’ve seen first-hand how it evolved from a beloved industry weekender into Europe’s most vital launchpad for new music.

But 2025 feels like more than just another year.

This year’s event is a reset, not just for the festival, but for the spirit of independent music culture itself. Free from those corporate ties, the energy feels recalibrated. The bookings are bolder. The buzz is back.

And with SXSW London waiting in the wings, The Great Escape 2025 is making its mark more clearly than ever: intimate, urgent, and absolutely unmissable.

Why TGE Still Matters

The Great Escape has never been about scale. It’s about proximity — to the stage, to the artists, and to the moment before something explodes. It’s the only place you might see a future headliner in a 120-cap basement venue, then again three hours later playing a beach stage to a swelling crowd already obsessed.

This year, the programming is the strongest it’s been in a decade. Not just in volume, but in vision, showcasing radical new voices, high-concept artistry, and those quietly thrilling acts on the cusp.

Here are just a few names you absolutely shouldn’t miss:

Sim0ne
Once a bedroom DJ, now BBC Radio 1’s Future Star and Lana Del Rey collaborator, sim0ne is bringing euphoric, high-energy sets that blend hard house, happy hardcore, and emotional peaks. Her viral Boiler Room set proved she’s more than hype, she’s the future.

Westside Cowboy
Winners of Glastonbury’s Emerging Talent Competition and already a sensation with just two singles, this band has four chances to win you over. A must-see for anyone chasing bragging rights.

Corto.alto
Glasgow’s genre-fluid jazz innovator, blending broken beat, dub, and digital production into something totally alive. Playing three times — and absolutely worth catching more than once.

Kousto
Dreamy French disco for sun-soaked moments, with nods to Jacques Cousteau and co-signs from Honey Dijon and Folamour. If you’re craving something immersive and vibey, Kousto is essential.

Ziyad Al-Samman
Think psychedelic disco-pop with Prince swagger and Jordanian soul. A livewire performer who delivers joy and chaos in equal measure. His debut EP Pleasure Complex is a serotonin rush.

Pem
Vocals so distinctive they feel peerless, part of what made her Cloud Work EP one of 2024’s underground gems. Her solo church set will be a spiritual moment, full stop.

KÄSSY
A sonic shapeshifter channeling beauty, chaos, apathy and euphoria all at once. Her music defies definition, just know you won’t forget it.

Luvcat
A Liverpool goth-pop siren with a backstory that reads like a novel: Parisian circus stints, sailor adventures, and tracks that drip with Cure-style drama. Five singles in, this is likely her last small-room tour.

Mandrake Handshake
Seven to ten members strong (depending on the day), their psych-drenched wall of sound is impossible to stand still to. A must for fans of groove, movement, and maximalism.

Witch Post
A duo born out of coincidence, two artists from towns named Alaska, one in the US, one in Scotland, now crafting some of the year’s most addictive indie-electronic tracks. Expect chemistry and killer melodies.

Not Just Another Showcase

The Great Escape has always been more than a festival. It’s a collision point for artists, agents, fans and friends. For deals inked on napkins. For long-lost collaborators reunited in queue lines. For the buzz in the pub afterward when everyone says, “Did you see that?”

And while SXSW London may grab headlines this year, TGE will remain the proving ground, the sweaty, sprint-between-venues, sleep-when-you’re-dead home of real discovery.

So lace up your most comfortable trainers. Stretch. Hydrate. And prepare to fall in love with the future of music, one tiny stage at a time.

Here’s to late nights, breakout sets, and seaside magic; have a killer week, TGE fam.

Pinterest at Coachella: When Trend Forecasting Becomes Real-World Influence

Coachella has always been more than just a music festival, it’s a cultural canvas, a barometer for style, and a live-action moodboard for what’s next. And in 2025, one platform quietly, yet powerfully, helped shape the entire aesthetic landscape of the festival: Pinterest.

While most brand activations at Coachella aim for viral moments and influencer buzz, Pinterest took a more layered approach,  one rooted in data, relevance, and cultural intuition. The result? A standout presence that didn’t just complement the festival experience, it helped define it.

The Source of Style: How Pinterest Predicted the Festival Look

Pinterest has always been a hub for inspiration, but ahead of Coachella 2025, the platform became a style authority. By analyzing millions of user searches tied to the festival, Pinterest was able to forecast the top aesthetics Gen Z and fashion-minded audiences were gravitating toward, including emerging trends like Dark Ethereal and Pastel Goth.

But it didn’t stop at trend prediction. Pinterest also surfaced how festival-goers were remixing and personalising these styles. The platform showcased a new wave of self-expression: blending references, layering aesthetics, and making the look their own. That level of cultural sensitivity, backed by real-time user behaviour, made Pinterest a powerful guide for anyone planning their Coachella fits.

The Manifest Station: Turning Inspiration Into Action

On the ground, Pinterest brought its digital influence into the real world with the Manifest Station, an immersive activation designed to help attendees explore and embody the trends they’d been Pinning for weeks.

The experience featured curated style boards from celebrity stylists, interactive displays, and, most importantly, free on-site glam teams ready to help anyone bring their look to life.

And they meant anyone. As Pinterest put it:

“You don’t have to be Chappell Roan to have our free on-site stylists make all your festival dreams come true.”

(Though Chappell Roan did show up, which made the moment all the more iconic.)

This approach created a rare balance: it honoured the influencer ecosystem while making space for the everyday user to feel seen, celebrated, and styled.

Measurable Impact, Cultural Resonance

Pinterest didn’t just make a splash visually, the impact was measurable. The platform saw a significant spike in engagement tied to Coachella-related searches: from outfit planning and accessories, to hair, nails, and makeup. Users weren’t just inspired; they were activated.

Pinterest had successfully moved from moodboarding to meaningfully influencing how festival-goers prepared, dressed, and expressed themselves, both online and IRL.

Why This Strategy Worked

In an age where influencer-driven activations can feel exclusive or performative, Pinterest chose a smarter path — one that recognises both the power of creators and the value of the broader community.

By embracing a both/and mindset, prioritising big cultural moments and everyday self-expression, Pinterest delivered an experience rooted in relevance, accessibility, and authenticity. It showed that cultural leadership isn’t just about who you platform, but how you empower the full spectrum of your audience.

For brands watching from the sidelines: this is the blueprint.

Amplifying the Future: Ed Sheeran's Call to Save UK Music Education

Ed Sheeran's recent open letter to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is more than a celebrity backed plea it is a powerful testament to the role music plays in society. With support from cultural icons like Elton John, Harry Styles, Stormzy, Annie Lennox, and Central Cee, alongside voices such as Myles Smith and Ezra Collective, Sheeran's call for a £250 million music education package is a vital rallying cry for equitable access to creative expression. But beyond the headlines, it underscores a deeper truth: the health of the UK's music industry is inextricably linked to the future of music education.

A Broken Symphony: The State of UK Music Education

Sheeran’s letter arrives against a backdrop of declining music provision in schools. Reports from the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) reveal a 21% decrease in music education across state schools over five years. This means fewer instruments in classrooms, fewer qualified teachers, and fewer opportunities for students to engage with music. It is a sobering reality in a nation celebrated for producing some of the world’s most influential artists.

While private schools continue to offer comprehensive music programmes, the disparity in access is glaring. Music education has become a privilege rather than a right, leaving countless young people without the opportunity to explore their creative potential. The consequence? A cultural landscape at risk of losing its vibrancy and diversity.

Music as a Vehicle for Opportunity

Sheeran’s own story is a prime example of what is possible when young talent is nurtured. From performing in small local venues to dominating global charts, his trajectory is both inspiring and illustrative of the transformative power of music. But, as he poignantly notes, not every aspiring musician has the same support.

The Ed Sheeran Foundation's focus on grassroots initiatives funding schools, supporting teachers, and investing in apprenticeships demonstrates a clear commitment to breaking down barriers. Music education, particularly in underrepresented communities, has the potential to uplift individuals, foster confidence, and offer pathways into an industry that contributes £7.6 billion to the UK economy.

Beyond Celebration: A Responsibility to Sustain

The success of UK artists on the global stage is no coincidence. It is the result of decades of investment in music education, community projects, and grassroots venues. However, the alarming decline in music programmes threatens this legacy. Sheeran’s letter rightly points out that last year saw the absence of a UK global top 10 single or album a stark reminder of what is at stake.

Music is more than an economic asset it is a cultural force that shapes identity, fosters community, and amplifies voices. For every BRIT Award winner, there are thousands of emerging talents honing their craft in schools, local music clubs, and grassroots venues. Protecting these spaces is essential to ensuring the next generation of artists has the opportunity to thrive.

The Path Forward

Sheeran’s call for long term funding echoes broader conversations about the value we place on arts education. It is a challenge to policymakers to recognise that music is as vital to a well rounded education as science or sport. By committing £250 million to music education, the government can begin to repair the systemic damage caused by years of underfunding.

Furthermore, the proposed training of 1,000 music teachers and the expansion of music apprenticeships would address critical gaps in expertise and mentorship. Diversifying the curriculum would ensure that students from all backgrounds see themselves represented in the music they study, fostering a richer and more inclusive cultural landscape.

A Collective Responsibility

The overwhelming support for Sheeran’s initiative from across the music industry signals a collective understanding of what is at stake. As industry leaders, artists, and policymakers, there is a shared responsibility to protect and nurture the foundations of the UK’s musical legacy.

Ultimately, music education is not just about discovering the next Ed Sheeran or Adele it is about empowering young people with the confidence, creativity, and resilience that will serve them throughout their lives. As Sheeran so aptly put it, “music in and out of school should be for all, not a few.” The time to act is now.

The Commercialisation of Cultural Institutions: Balancing Influence and Integrity

Cultural institutions have long been the custodians of artistic expression and societal reflection. From opera houses to contemporary galleries, they serve as both mirrors and makers of culture. But as public funding dwindles and private investment grows, the question arises: how can these institutions maintain their integrity while relying on commercial partnerships?

A New Era of Funding

The traditional model of state-funded arts is increasingly being supplemented, and in some cases supplanted, by private donors and corporate sponsors. Brands are recognising the power of cultural association to elevate their image, while wealthy philanthropists often see their contributions as a legacy of influence. In many instances, these partnerships enable groundbreaking exhibitions, performances, and educational programmes that may otherwise be unattainable.

Yet, the influence of financial backers is rarely without expectations. While most partnerships celebrate artistic freedom, the subtle pressure to align with corporate values or avoid controversial topics can present a challenge. When culture becomes intertwined with commerce, institutions must carefully navigate these dynamics to maintain public trust and artistic independence.

The Impact on Cultural Discourse

A reliance on private funding can, intentionally or not, shift the cultural conversation. Institutions may find themselves prioritising projects that attract high-profile sponsors or wealthy audiences rather than those that provoke critical thought or represent marginalised voices. Conversely, some brands have demonstrated a commitment to fostering progressive narratives and supporting underrepresented talent, showing that responsible commercial involvement can be a force for good.

Cultural leaders are now tasked with ensuring their institutions remain spaces of dialogue, dissent, and diversity. This means establishing transparent governance structures, ethical guidelines, and diverse boards that reflect a wide range of perspectives.

Finding the Balance

Striking the right balance requires institutions to be both pragmatic and principled. Successful partnerships are built on a shared commitment to artistic excellence, cultural enrichment, and public access. Some organisations are leading the way by implementing sponsorship policies that prioritise alignment with their core values, while others are investing in endowments to reduce dependence on external funding.

Furthermore, audience engagement has never been more critical. In the age of social media, the public has a powerful voice in holding institutions accountable. By fostering open dialogue and welcoming feedback, organisations can build resilient, responsive cultural ecosystems.

Looking Forward

The future of cultural institutions will be shaped by their ability to balance influence with integrity. As stewards of the arts, they have the opportunity to forge partnerships that celebrate creative freedom, elevate diverse voices, and contribute to a richer cultural dialogue.

The key question remains: how can institutions continue to innovate and inspire without compromising their purpose? The answer lies in leadership that champions transparency, courage, and a steadfast commitment to the cultural good.

In a world where commerce and culture are increasingly interconnected, those who navigate this landscape with clarity and conviction will shape the narratives that define our time. And that, perhaps, is the most powerful form of influence of all.

Tariff Threats, Cultural Fallout: How Trump's Trade War Shapes Brand Influence in Sports, Music, Entertainment, Alcohol, Beauty, Tech, Gaming, and Luxury Fashion

As Donald Trump escalates his rhetoric around tariffs and trade wars, brands across sports, music, entertainment, alcohol, beauty, tech, gaming, and luxury fashion face a new wave of uncertainty. While tariffs are traditionally discussed in economic terms, their ripple effects extend far beyond pricing and supply chains—impacting cultural relevance, brand positioning, and consumer sentiment in profound ways.

The Fragility of Cultural Capital

For brands, cultural relevance isn’t just about selling products—it’s about shaping conversations, driving engagement, and building communities. Tariffs disrupt this equilibrium by forcing brands to rethink their partnerships, pricing, and global market strategies. In industries reliant on cultural cachet—where perception is everything—this unpredictability is a dangerous game.

Music, Entertainment & Sports: A Collateral Cultural War

The music and entertainment industries are deeply intertwined with global trade. Merchandising, touring, streaming, and even the availability of musical instruments and production equipment are all vulnerable to tariff hikes. If Trump's policies trigger retaliatory measures from key markets like Europe or China, artists and entertainment brands could face rising costs, regulatory hurdles, and strained international relationships.

Canada has already warned of the impact of tariffs on the live music industry, with the Canadian Live Music Association’s president and CEO, Erin Benjamin, highlighting the uncertainty caused by these threats. While acknowledging the risks, she also pointed to opportunities for the domestic music scene, reinforcing the importance of supporting local talent. Similarly, Spencer Shewen, artistic director of the Mariposa Folk Festival, noted that Canadian talent is becoming even more dominant in response to these trade disruptions. (rootsmusic.ca)

Sports brands, which thrive on cross-border sponsorships and global fan engagement, also risk disruption. If tariffs hit apparel and footwear—industries already navigating economic headwinds—companies like Nike, adidas, and Puma may pass costs onto consumers, affecting accessibility and eroding brand loyalty. Meanwhile, American sports leagues with international ambitions (such as the NBA and MLS) may face backlash if geopolitical tensions sour overseas market expansion.

Alcohol & Beauty: Luxury, Exclusivity, and Market Volatility

The alcohol and beauty industries thrive on perception. Luxury spirits and premium beauty brands are global status symbols, carefully curated to resonate across cultures. But tariffs on European imports—think Scotch whisky, Champagne, and premium fragrance houses—create pricing volatility that alters the aspirational appeal of these products. Trump’s recent threat of a 200% tariff on European wines, Champagnes, and spirits has raised alarms among U.S. importers and retailers, with industry leaders warning of drastic reductions in demand. 

This isn’t just an economic issue; it’s a cultural one. If once-affordable luxury becomes unattainable, brand desirability could shift, opening the door for regional competitors to fill the void.

Luxury Fashion: The Price of Prestige

Luxury fashion is particularly vulnerable to tariffs, as it relies heavily on European craftsmanship and heritage. Iconic brands like Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Gucci, and Prada may face higher import duties on leather goods, handbags, and apparel. This could force them to either absorb the cost, reduce margins, or increase prices—potentially alienating aspirational consumers and affecting desirability.

A significant part of luxury fashion’s cultural relevance stems from its accessibility at various levels, whether through entry-level products like perfumes and accessories or high-end ready-to-wear collections. If tariffs disrupt this balance, the exclusivity that defines luxury could shift—creating an opportunity for emerging designers or locally produced alternatives to capture market share.

Additionally, the resale market—driven by platforms like The RealReal and StockX—could also be affected, as pricing adjustments ripple through the industry. This would impact not only luxury houses but also the broader ecosystem of influencers, stylists, and cultural tastemakers who contribute to brand storytelling and desirability.

Tech & Gaming: The Cost of Innovation

Tech and gaming are arguably the most exposed industries in this scenario. Manufacturing dependencies in China, Taiwan, and South Korea make hardware companies and gaming brands vulnerable to cost spikes. PlayStation, Xbox, and PC gaming brands may be forced to adjust pricing or delay product launches. Meanwhile, content creators—whose cultural influence extends beyond gaming into music, fashion, and film—may find sponsorship deals and brand collaborations disrupted as companies cut budgets in response to rising costs.

Analysis suggest that these tariff measures could lead to a 0.3% decrease in the U.S. GDP and a 0.2% reduction in the capital stock, reflecting potential declines in investment and economic growth. 

The Brand Strategy Imperative

For brands navigating this turbulent landscape, staying culturally relevant requires more than just financial agility. The brands that will emerge strongest are those that:

1. Double Down on Localised Storytelling: Brands should pivot their marketing strategies to lean into regional narratives, ensuring resonance even if global trade frictions impact accessibility.

2. Strengthen Authentic Collaborations: Strategic partnerships with artists, athletes, and cultural icons can help maintain brand desirability despite economic uncertainty.

3. Emphasise Sustainability & Ethical Sourcing: In a world increasingly driven by conscious consumerism, brands that champion domestic production, sustainability, and ethical sourcing can turn trade challenges into opportunities.

4. Adapt Pricing & Accessibility Strategies: Flexible pricing models, exclusive drops, and creative bundling can help maintain consumer interest despite tariff-induced cost fluctuations.

Final Thought: Tariffs as a Cultural Test

Trump’s tariff threats aren’t just about economics; they’re a litmus test for brand resilience in an era of geopolitical and cultural flux. The most successful brands won’t just react to economic policy—they’ll shape their own narratives, ensuring they remain relevant, desirable, and culturally indispensable in a world that’s constantly shifting beneath their feet.

The question is: will your brand weather the storm, or will it become another casualty of cultural irrelevance?

The Evolution of Podcasts: Navigating a Shifting Cultural Landscape

Not long ago, defining a podcast was simple. It was an audio show, distributed via RSS feeds to various platforms, consumed primarily through listening. But today, the lines are blurred. YouTube is now a leading podcast platform, Spotify has embraced video, and monetisation has expanded beyond ad sales into live tours, merch, newsletters, and social media activations. The very notion of what a podcast is—and where it belongs—has become increasingly fluid.

This shift is not just about semantics; it has profound implications for creators, audiences, and the business of content distribution. The once-clear boundaries between podcasts, traditional broadcasting, and influencer-driven media have dissolved. Today’s biggest podcast names are just as likely to be digital-first content creators who bypassed traditional audio production as they are veterans from public radio. The industry is being reshaped by new audience behaviours, platform priorities, and the rising power of personal brands.

The Fragmentation of Audio and Video

For years, podcasting was an audio-first medium, a space where storytelling, conversation, and journalism thrived through the power of the human voice. But as visual platforms like YouTube and TikTok push further into spoken content, podcasts are becoming a hybrid of audio and video experiences. Does this mean a podcast is now simply content that can be understood whether heard or watched? Some argue that the term no longer serves a clear purpose at all.

A similar shift occurred in television and film. Streaming services disrupted traditional formats, blurring distinctions between cinema and episodic content. Now, podcasting is experiencing its own disruption. “Simulcast,” “new broadcast,” and other attempts to redefine the space hint at a broader transformation. The medium is no longer constrained by its original technical definition; it is evolving into an adaptable, multi-platform experience.

The Business of Podcasting: Where Do Creators Fit?

As the industry expands, so do the economic stakes. Who owns the rights to monetise a podcast when it exists as a YouTube series, a live tour, and a merch-driven brand? Should podcasters be classified as influencers, tapping into the multi-billion-dollar creator economy, or should they remain within the podcast advertising ecosystem? These questions are no longer theoretical—they are shaping the financial models that sustain creators and networks alike.

Podcast networks and platforms must now structure deals that account for the fluidity of content distribution. The power dynamics between creators, distributors, and advertisers are shifting. The challenge is not just about defining what a podcast is, but also about ensuring sustainable revenue streams for those who create them.

The Future of Podcasting: A Cultural Reframing

At its core, podcasting has always been about storytelling and community. Whether through an intimate conversation, investigative reporting, or deep-dive analysis, the format thrives on engagement. Perhaps the most enduring definition of a podcast is not a technical one, but a cultural one: a platform for voices, narratives, and ideas to resonate in an increasingly fragmented digital landscape.

If podcasts are to remain relevant, they must continue to evolve alongside audience habits and technological shifts. The question is not just “What is a podcast?” but “How do we continue to build meaningful experiences in a world where content exists everywhere?” The answer will shape the future of storytelling itself.

The Cultural Fallout of Tariff Wars: How Political Volatility Threatens Creative Industries

The Cultural Fallout of Tariff Wars: How Political Volatility Threatens Creative Industries

In a world where cultural currency is as valuable as economic capital, the unpredictability of U.S. tariff policies threatens more than just trade relations—it puts entire creative industries at risk. Former President Trump’s latest declaration of a potential 200% tariff on European wines, champagnes, and other alcoholic products underscores the volatile nature of international trade disputes. But beyond the economic ramifications, such policies have a ripple effect that stifles cultural exchange, creativity, and the jobs that sustain them.

The Cultural Ecosystem at Risk

Cultural relevance in marketing has always been tied to global storytelling—borrowing from, celebrating, and elevating different traditions to create resonant narratives. Tariff wars, however, disrupt this exchange. When costs skyrocket on imported goods like French champagne or Italian wines, it’s not just a luxury market issue; it limits access to the cultural markers that shape experiences. Brands that thrive on authenticity—whether it’s a Michelin-starred chef curating menus or a spirits brand partnering with European vineyards—will face severe creative restrictions.

Marketing thrives on cultural symbols. Imagine a world where a brand can no longer affordably use Bordeaux in its high-end activations or where fashion and fragrance collaborations with European maisons become prohibitively expensive. These aren’t just economic transactions; they’re cultural connections that elevate brand stories. Tariffs restrict the accessibility of these narratives, forcing brands to either limit their scope or dilute their authenticity.

The Impact on Creativity and Jobs

The creative economy—spanning advertising, design, media, and experiential marketing—is built on the free flow of ideas, goods, and talent. Tariffs, especially retaliatory ones, put up barriers where there should be bridges. If the U.S. imposes a 200% tariff on European wines and spirits, the European Union is likely to counter with its own levies on American exports, including cultural products like film, music, and fashion. The collateral damage? American and European creatives alike.

Take the spirits industry: mixologists, event curators, and brand ambassadors who rely on European imports will see budgets slashed. Limited access to key products will force experiential marketing teams to rethink strategies—likely at the expense of cultural depth. Jobs tied to these industries, from hospitality professionals to creative agencies, will feel the squeeze as brands cut costs and campaigns scale back.

The False Promise of Protectionism

Trump frames these tariffs as a boon for domestic industries, suggesting American wine and champagne businesses will flourish in the absence of European competition. However, protectionist policies rarely deliver on such promises. The last round of U.S.-EU tariff disputes saw American whiskey exports plummet by 35% when Europe retaliated with its own levies. Similarly, if European alcohol becomes too expensive, consumers may not automatically shift to American alternatives—they may simply consume less or pivot to different categories altogether.

Moreover, the global luxury and hospitality industries don’t operate in silos. A five-star hotel in New York cannot replace Dom Pérignon with a domestic sparkling wine without altering its brand positioning. The same applies to luxury retailers, fine dining establishments, and global cultural institutions that rely on European imports as part of their brand identity. Tariff wars force them to make compromises that dilute their credibility and appeal.

Cultural Relevance Beyond Borders

For marketing and creativity to thrive, cultural relevance must remain fluid. Artificially inflating prices on heritage-rich products disrupts more than just consumer choice; it severs cultural ties that fuel innovation and storytelling. When access to international goods is hindered, the creative economy—one of the most vital drivers of global influence—suffers.

The U.S.-EU trade skirmishes are not just about bottom lines; they are about the interconnectedness of industries that rely on open cultural exchange. From advertising to hospitality, from fashion to film, cultural narratives are built on shared traditions. If tariffs become a political weapon, the collateral damage extends far beyond trade—it strikes at the very heart of the creative industries that shape global culture.

At a time when cultural storytelling has never been more important, the question isn’t just about economics—it’s about what kind of world we want to create. And that world should be one of connection, not division.