Jan 19Liked by Matt Klein

Matt- good stuff, again.

The final sequence of this one is interesting... DP says: celebs are good for building absolutely base-level trust conditions. MK then repeats what marketers 'know,' viz., that nano and micro are trending in, celebs trending out. Then, MK makes this provocation: "are drugs celebs’ last life raft for consumer relevance?"

Should we be thinking more about how trust conditions differ in different marketing situations? We might not need a celeb to influence a campaign for, say, Apple products – there's already heaps of trust there. But for a novel product or a novel vertical, where base-level trust conditions are yet to be established, maybe celebs can still be genuinely powerful there...

Also, drugs are an interesting example because they effect the imagination in a really direct way, so connecting a stable, life-raft type image to the brand and consumer experience could be really helpful. Basically what I mean is: for many consumers, an image of a larger-than-life rapper they love or actor they adore might actually be stabilizing for them when they're tripping out off some wayyyy too strong edibles. Celebrity imago as trip sitter...

Final and more speculative thought: as nano and micro influence trends in, a hard distinction RETURNS between everyday people-influencers and celebs. We've arguably spent the last 10 years in a 'celebs, they're just like us!' moment – but as we turn more towards nano and micro, celebs are liberated once again to NOT be like you and me, but to be heroic, larger-than-life, unimpeachable. Perhaps on the drop edge of yonder we can spot the dawn of a new era of old-school celebrity.

Expand full comment