Menu

future

cage

Predictability as a Prison

, , , ,

How recommendation systems turned human curiosity into a closed loop.

Hey culturonauts—

Let’s slow this down. Because this story didn’t break all at once. It drifted into place, quietly, like a habit you don’t notice until it owns you.

There was a moment — a very real one — when the internet felt expansive. Not because it offered infinity, but because it offered accident. You could trip over an Icelandic jazz trio, stumble into a Korean indie film, fall headfirst in love with a painter from Nairobi who didn’t care about being “algorithm-friendly.”

Discovery wasn’t gamified. It wasn’t a KPI. It wasn’t domesticated. It just… happened. Like every good thing in culture always has.

And then the machines learned what we didn’t want them to learn: that curiosity is volatile, expensive, slow. Repetition is none of those things.

The Silent Reversal

The biggest cultural plot twist of the last decade is that the very systems built to liberate our taste ended up compressing it. At first, gently. Then aggressively. Then structurally.

Not by limiting choice — that would be too obvious. Too crude.

Instead, they limited surprise.

And surprise is the oxygen of human taste.

We didn’t notice the shift because the interfaces stayed friendly. The playlists got prettier. The thumbnails got cleaner. The recommendations got “smarter.”

But beneath that surface, something fundamental broke:

the relationship between what we like and what we could like.

That gap — that gorgeous, essential, maddening gap — is where culture grows.

And the algorithm closed it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Optimization Trap

Let’s name the villain correctly: optimization.

Algorithms didn’t collapse culture because they’re evil. They collapsed it because we asked them to keep us watching, listening, scrolling.

We handed them the keys and said:

“Show me more of what works.”

And the machine — obedient, literal, ruthlessly efficient — did exactly that.

It learned the shape of your attention.

Then it built a cage around it.

Spotify’s Discover Weekly turned into an echo chamber with better cover art. Netflix became a hall of mirrors where the mirror gets cleaned weekly. Instagram stopped showing you the world and started showing you a refined simulation of your previous week.

This is not personalisation. This is pattern reinforcement.

And patterns do not evolve. They calcify.

Culture Under Compression

Here’s the part we underestimate: algorithms don’t just react to culture — they pre‑empt it.

Artists now create with a third collaborator in the room:

  • the algorithm’s taste for hooks in the first seven seconds
  • the algorithm’s preference for familiar genre blends
  • the algorithm’s impatience with ambiguity or slowness
  • the algorithm’s obsession with clarity at the expense of texture

This creates a new kind of cultural gravity: everything pulled toward the median.

The bold becomes softened. The strange becomes normalized. The difficult becomes invisible.

We call it personalization, but what it really is — if we’re honest — is cultural flattening disguised as convenience.

And the tragedy is that we’re not losing quality. We’re losing range.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Prediction Is Not Understanding

Here’s the uncomfortable truth we avoid because it feels too philosophical for a Tuesday morning:

Algorithms do not model who you are. They model who you’ve already been.

You are not being understood. You are being reduced. Compressed into categories. Distilled into clusters. Smoothed into probabilities.

Taste, in its natural form, is chaotic. Contradictory. Incoherent. Embarrassing. Evolving.

The algorithm hates all of that.

Its job is not to explore you — its job is to stabilize you.

A stable user is predictable. A predictable user is profitable. A profitable user is easy to retain.

And retention is the only religion the algorithm believes in.

The Death of Serendipity

Serendipity isn’t randomness. It’s an intrusion — a disruption — a friction that forces your inner world to expand.

Think about the last time you encountered something that didn’t fit your profile, but stayed with you anyway. That piece of music you weren’t supposed to like. That film you almost skipped. That book recommended by a human who didn’t know your “taste graph” and didn’t care.

That’s how taste evolves: through discomfort. Through contradiction. Through exposure to what sits outside your predicted perimeter.

But machines don’t like those edges. Machines optimize for consensus.

And consensus is where culture goes to die.

Reintroducing Friction (A Human Luxury)

If we want to reclaim our taste — really reclaim it — we need to reintroduce the very things our systems are engineered to delete:

  • the off-note
  • the difficult book
  • the unmarketable film
  • the song that takes three listens to open up
  • the idea that challenges instead of soothing
  • the artist who refuses to be legible

Discovery was never supposed to be convenient. It was supposed to be transformative.

And transformation never comes from the familiar.

We have to allow culture to surprise us again — to break our patterns, disturb our certainty, and remind us that curiosity is not a demographic metric but a human impulse.

Because a system that only feeds you what you already like doesn’t serve you.

It cages you.

Until next time, stay unpredictable.

Alex

At Kredo Marketing, we help companies think beyond the algorithm—designing strategies that protect curiosity, not just performance.

irr2

Human, Interrupted

, , , , , ,

A brief history of how power replaced purpose.

Hey empire builders—

The first man who thought he could control the sun wasn’t an entrepreneur. He was a god. Or at least, he thought so.

Power has always been the most addictive hallucinogen in human history. It starts as ambition, grows into conviction, and ends in delusion. From pharaohs who bent rivers to CEOs who bend markets, our species keeps replaying the same myth: that someone, somewhere, can command everything.

The ancient prototypes of hubris

Before spreadsheets and stock options, there were crowns and temples.

Egypt built its economy on immortality: thousands of workers carving eternity out of stone so one man could outlive time. Rome industrialized divinity — emperors rebranded as gods, their faces stamped on every coin, their will treated as natural law. And the medieval Church? It turned guilt into the most scalable business model ever created — sin was the problem, salvation the subscription.

Each of these systems was built on the same foundation: the illusion that control equals order. That the closer you are to the divine, the further you are from chaos. But history always corrects arrogance.

Every pyramid crumbles.

Every empire burns.

Every infallible institution eventually drowns in its own faith.

The corporate gods of the 20th century

Fast forward a few millennia and the gods have swapped robes for hoodies. But the pattern remains.

Enron, once ranked No. 7 on the Fortune 500, believed it could rewrite the laws of economics through accounting sorcery. When it collapsed in 2001, it erased $74 billion in shareholder value and became a monument to human arrogance. It wasn’t a company — it was a theology of deception.

WeWork, founded in 2010 by Adam Neumann, said it would elevate the world’s consciousness. In 2019, it was valued at $47 billion before collapsing into one of the most spectacular IPO failures in history.

Theranos, founded by Elizabeth Holmes at age 19, promised to end disease with a drop of blood. In 2022, she was sentenced to 11 years in prison for fraud.

These weren’t business models; they were belief systems. Each founder became a prophet, each investor a disciple. And like every religion, doubt was heresy. Reality became negotiable — until it wasn’t.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Empires never collapse in silence.

They fall to applause. Journalists hesitate, employees self-censor, investors fear missing the next miracle. The social bias that built monarchs now fuels markets: if everyone believes, it must be true.

The WeWork cult wasn’t blind loyalty — it was collective hypnosis. Enron’s analysts weren’t stupid — they were complicit. The Theranos board wasn’t naïve — it was enchanted by the glow of genius. Rupert Murdoch, Henry Kissinger, James Mattis — all brilliant minds, all fooled.

We call it innovation, but it’s just idolatry in a nicer suit.

Because when someone looks unstoppable, we stop asking questions.

The billionaires’ pantheon

Today, omnipotence has gone interstellar.

Jeff Bezos rented Venice for his wedding — the city that once ruled trade now became a backdrop for private spectacle. Elon Musk spends more time tweeting about Mars than improving life on Earth, while sending tourists into orbit for $55 million per seat. Mark Zuckerberg’s Metaverse lost over $40 billion and yet he still insists it will change humanity. Bill Gates owns over 275,000 acres of U.S. farmland — more than any other individual — as if sustainability could be privatized.

We used to worship gods for their mercy. Now we worship billionaires for their audacity.

We mistake scale for significance, ambition for virtue, excess for vision. But look closely and the myth is fraying: burnout rates in tech are at record highs, global inequality widens every year, and the richest 1% own nearly half the world’s wealth.

When ego expands faster than empathy, humanity becomes collateral damage.

The ones who said no

A few resist the gravity of omnipotence.

Yvon Chouinard, founder of Patagonia, donated his $3 billion company to fight climate change. His statement was brutally simple: “Earth is now our only shareholder.”

Brunello Cucinellibuilt an empire on dignity and craftsmanship, paying his workers 20% above average and funding philosophy festivals in his hometown of Solomeo.

The Mondragon cooperative in Spain, with over 80,000 employees and €12 billion in revenue, runs on democratic ownership — no gods, no kings, just workers.

They remind us that restraint can be radical. That humanity can still be profitable.

Greatness doesn’t require domination. It requires proportion.

 

Every age has its gods. Some rule nations, others rule timelines. Some build pyramids, others build algorithms. The tragedy is the same: the more control we gain, the less capable we become of seeing limits.

In business, hubris always disguises itself as vision.

And when vision stops being questioned, it becomes a religion. The same fire that forges progress also burns civilizations — the only difference is how long we pretend not to smell the smoke.

When you believe you can do everything, you eventually destroy something.

Until next time, stay grounded.

machine

Who Stops the Chant of the Machines?

, , , , , , , ,

Hey thinkers,

The numbers are getting absurd.

Meta recently revealed that only 7% of the content people consume daily comes from people they actually know.

The rest is algorithmic noise—a finely tuned chaos machine optimized not for connection, but for retention. We were promised community. What we got instead was a dopamine factory that turned friendship into metrics and meaning into impressions.

So where does this infinite scroll lead? And can we still find a way out before the feed consumes everything—including us?

The algorithm that ate intimacy

Social networks once sold us the dream of human connection. But as user growth plateaued, the metrics shifted.

Algorithms learned that outrage and novelty outperform nuance and empathy. By 2025, the average user spends 147 minutes a day on social media—but interacts meaningfully with fewer than five real people.

The system doesn’t want your friendships—it wants your friction. Negative engagement increases dwell time by up to 300%, according to MIT research. Your emotions aren’t byproducts; they’re inputs in an attention economy that monetizes anxiety, envy, and tribal rage. Platforms that began as tools for connection now operate as prediction markets for behavior. The better they can anticipate what will keep you scrolling, the more valuable you become.

Shoshana Zuboff called it surveillance capitalism. By 2025, it has evolved into behavioral capitalism: not just tracking what you do, but shaping what you’ll do next.

Recommendation engines no longer react—they pre-empt. TikTok’s For You Page predicts content preferences with over 80% accuracy after only 90 minutes of use. Instagram’s Reels now tests over 200 micro-variables per user per session. Every scroll is a behavioral bet, a tiny economic transaction disguised as entertainment.

And just like markets, these systems favor volatility.

Calm doesn’t convert. Outrage does.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The cultural side effects

We are entering the era of engineered emotion. Elections, wars, and cultural debates are filtered through virality algorithms that privilege speed over substance.

During the 2024 European elections, researchers at the Oxford Internet Institute found that disinformation posts received 4x more engagement than verified news. The same logic drives every controversy: friction equals fuel.

The result? Context collapse. Political discourse becomes spectacle. Activism becomes branding. Even empathy becomes content.

Influencers aren’t anomalies—they’re archetypes. The influencer economy, now worth $21.5 billion in 2025, teaches ordinary users to monetize their personalities. Authenticity is no longer organic; it’s optimized. The platform rewards parasocial proximity—the illusion of intimacy between strangers—because it scales better than real relationships ever could.

What used to be friendship is now a subscription model. We don’t connect; we consume each other.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The new digital resistance

If 2010-2020 was the era of public feeds, 2025-2030 will be the rise of the private web. Already, time spent on closed ecosystems like Discord, Signal, Geneva, and Substack Notes has grown 62% year-over-year. People are migrating from performative platforms to smaller, semi-anonymous spaces where conversation feels human again.

Even more radical movements are emerging:

  • Are.na – a minimalist network built for knowledge-sharing, not scrolling. No ads, no algorithms, just collective intelligence.
  • Mastodon & Pixelfed – federated platforms running on open protocols, where users own the servers and the data. A slow, frictionless alternative to Meta’s monopolies.
  • Nostr & Bluesky – decentralized microblogging ecosystems that treat identity as portable, not owned.
  • Coop Cloud & Discourse communities – where governance is transparent and participation replaces performativity.

The shift is subtle but seismic: people are no longer fleeing the internet—they’re reclaiming it. They want digital spaces with boundaries, where moderation replaces manipulation, and belonging isn’t a metric.

Still, Meta, TikTok, and YouTube will follow. Algorithms are learning to infiltrate these micro-ecosystems with ambient personalization: contextual ads, predictive topic feeds, AI-generated posts that imitate the tone of your circle. The illusion of escape will hold—until monetization catches up.

Toward a post-algorithmic internet

There’s a new design ethos rising: slow media, shared authorship, ethical attention. Platforms that will survive the next decade are those built on three principles:

  1. Transparency over manipulation. No black-box algorithms. Users must see and shape the logic behind what they consume.
  2. Community over virality. Platforms like Lighthouse (emerging in 2025) reward contribution and dialogue rather than clicks.
  3. Curation as resistance. Instead of algorithmic feeds, people are curating collective archives—human recommendation engines that rediscover trust in taste.

The real revolution won’t come from deleting apps. It will come from building better ones: humane, federated, open-source infrastructures that treat our time as sacred, not saleable.

Maybe the only rebellion left is slowness.

Logging off won’t dismantle the machine, but resisting its rhythm might. The algorithm thrives on acceleration; reflection starves it.

Future platforms that endure will be those that design for depth over dopamine. Spaces where time spent isn’t just counted but considered. These include long-form newsletters, cooperative platforms, forums like Are.na, and digital co-ops that reject ad-driven capitalism altogether. They’re small, imperfect, and gloriously inefficient—which might be exactly why they matter.

We built networks to connect us and ended up building mirrors that multiply us. Every scroll feeds the chorus of the machine. The question isn’t whether it will stop singing—but whether we can remember our own sound beneath the noise.

Until next time, stay awake.

Alex

ends

When Wanting ends

, , , , , ,

The Day the Funnel Went Silent

Hey thinkers—

Let’s take a step back. Not from the screen, but from the act of wanting itself.

Because marketing has built its empire on a fragile assumption: that people will always want more.

But what if that’s ending?

The Quiet Rebellion of Not Wanting

Across Europe, Japan, and the U.S., entire demographics are opting out. They’re not just skipping ads—they’re skipping wanting.

A 2024 Deloitte study found that 62% of Gen Z actively limit their online exposure to brands, and 41% have unsubscribed from all commercial newsletters in the last year. Not out of cynicism—out of exhaustion.

This isn’t minimalism anymore. It’s existential self-defense.

When every click, ping, and push notification demands another micro-decision, refusing to want becomes an act of autonomy. Desire has become a form of labor—and many have decided to stop working.

 

Marketing vs. Meaning: The Machinery Breaks Down

For decades, marketing has relied on emotional engineering: highlight the lack, amplify the fear, sell the fix. It worked flawlessly—until it didn’t.

Because today’s audience is fluent in the mechanics of persuasion. They can smell intent before your campaign even loads.

We are no longer fooled by the promise of “new.” We crave peace, not progress. We want silence, not slogans.

And yet, the industry keeps screaming louder, mistaking fatigue for indifference.

The paradox? The louder brands shout, the more invisible they become

The Silent Consumer

The “Silent Consumer” is the new ghost in the machine. They don’t buy impulsively. They observe. They lurk. They save, repair, unsubscribe.

They are not brand-loyal; they are brand-aware—aware of manipulation, waste, and noise.

They exist in contradiction: still online, but emotionally logged off. They scroll, but without belief. They read, but don’t react. They see your ads, but don’t see you.

And maybe that’s the message marketers refuse to hear: you can’t convert someone who doesn’t want to play the game.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Anti-Market Brand

The next wave of relevance won’t come from being louder or smarter—but from being quieter.

True innovation today hides behind restraint.

Consider MUD Jeans, a Dutch company that leases denim instead of selling it.

Customers return worn-out jeans for recycling, closing the loop instead of opening another transaction.

Or Hiut Denim Co. in Wales, which built its model on making fewer pairs of jeans—crafted slowly, one batch at a time—and built a cult following by doing less on purpose.

Then there’s Public Goods, which stripped away packaging design altogether to remind buyers that simplicity can be luxury.

Or Fussy, the refillable deodorant brand that turned its community into co-designers rather than consumers.

These companies don’t sell rebellion—they embody patience. They trade hype for humility, speed for trust.

They don’t push presence; they invite it.

They are not anti-business—they’re post-business. Brands that sell by refusing to manipulate, that build loyalty by staying still.

Because when a brand respects space, it creates gravity. Maybe the future isn’t about attention—it’s about absence.

Economists already talk about the attention economy as oversaturated. What’s next is the Presence Economy—where the rarest commodity isn’t your time, but your trust.

Being present doesn’t mean being everywhere. It means being real, intentional, and optional.

You can’t retarget someone who finds peace in being unreachable.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Death of the Funnel, The Rise of the Void

Traditional marketing funnels assume a restless customer: Awareness → Interest → Desire → Action.

But what happens when the system meets stillness?

Today’s consumers are walking away from funnels entirely. They want narratives without hooks, connection without conversion, stories without scarcity.

They don’t need another thing. They need space to breathe.

And the brands that understand this won’t vanish—they’ll endure. Because silence, too, can sell.

Maybe the next frontier isn’t persuasion—it’s permission.

Permission to stop shouting.

Permission to exist without expectation.

Permission to mean something only when it’s needed.

That’s not weakness. That’s evolution.

The most powerful message a brand can send in 2025 might simply be:

“We’re here when you need us—and it’s okay if you don’t.”

Until next time, stay real.

Alex

🚀 At Kredo Marketing, we help brands evolve beyond noise — building clarity, empathy, and lasting trust in a world that’s tired of being sold to.

💬 Let’s create presence, not pressure.

crisis

Crisis, Clicks, Cash

, , , , ,

Bad news isn’t an accident. It’s an economy.

Hey doomscrollers—

Your brain isn’t broken.

It’s doing exactly what it evolved to do: fixating on threats. Sabertooth tiger? Deadly drought? Rival tribe? Pay attention or get eaten. Fast-forward a few millennia, and the saber-tooth is gone, but the bias stayed.

Which is why in 2025 your feed looks like a war zone of recessions, scandals, and disasters—even when GDP is up and you just got a raise.

Why we can’t quit doom

Multiple studies keep showing the same ugly truth: negative news headlines get 30–40% more clicksthan neutral or positive ones. A 2023 analysis of 100k articles confirmed over half of headlines were negatively framed.

Algorithms optimize for engagement, so negativity wins the auction every time. The cycle is self-perpetuating: outrage boosts clicks, clicks boost ad revenue, revenue tells editors to turn the crank harder.

And no, it’s not because “the world is worse.” By most metrics—poverty rates, disease, even wars—the world is less deadly than 50 years ago.

But perception beats reality every single time.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Fear makes markets twitch

Markets are jittery not because investors read reports but because they read headlines.

  • COVID, 2020: $11 trillion wiped in weeks before the virus had even spread globally. The panic was the product.
  • Recession hype, 2022–23: NBER research showed pessimistic coverage accelerates downturns. Businesses pull back “just in case,” and guess what? That caution creates the slowdown.
  • Inflation panic, 2024: consumer spending dipped in Europe despite real wages rising, purely because news cycles screamed “crisis.” People didn’t feel richer, so they didn’t spend.

Markets don’t run on fundamentals alone. They run on mood—and mood runs on headlines.

Brands built on fear

Insurance, pharma, cybersecurity—some of the most profitable industries today owe their dominance to the ability to weaponize anxiety. They don’t just sell products; they sell protection from nightmares, both real and imagined. Cybersecurity spending will hit $188B in 2025, not because hacks have suddenly tripled, but because fear-based campaigns convince CEOs that not buying protection is corporate suicide. Big Pharma plays the same card with “what if the next pandemic is worse?” Insurance thrives on the whispered what if that keeps you awake at 3am.

But here’s the dirty secret:fear is an accelerant, not a foundation.

It spikes sales in the short term but erodes trust in the long run. Remember the COVID gougers? They made headlines, then made enemies. Contrast that with Patagonia or Moderna’s repositioning: Patagonia doesn’t scream apocalypse—it frames climate crisis as a call to arms. Moderna shifted from doomsday scenarios to a message of stability and readiness.

Fear is easy. Hope, positioned well, outlasts it.

Breaking the doom loop

Negativity bias isn’t going anywhere—you can’t debug evolution. But businesses can decide whether to exploit it shamelessly or to play smarter.

Too many brands binge on panic marketing like it’s an energy drink—cheap, spiky, and ultimately leaving the audience with a crash and a headache.

The smarter alternative? Frame risk as solvable.

Saying “AI will kill your job” gets clicks, but pairing it with tools and training builds customers. Balance fear with agency. Outrage might get you viral, but agency earns you loyalty. And above all, play the long game.Fear may open wallets, but trust keeps them open.

Panic is fast food. Credibility is compound interest.

The choice is simple: you can keep feeding the doom loop, or you can break it by giving people a story they actually want to stick with.

Then…

Negativity is the cheapest currency in media. It sells ads, it moves markets, it hijacks strategy. But if your business only reacts to fear, you’re playing someone else’s game. The real edge is mastering the balance: use the bias, but don’t get eaten by it.

Until next time, stay fearless.

Alex

At Kredo Marketing, we help businesses cut through the doom loop. While negativity drives clicks, your brand deserves a strategy built on trust, clarity, and long-term impact.

billion

The Billionaire OS

, , , , ,

The Hidden Software Behind Your “Free” Market

Hey contrarians—

Forget the fairy tale of free markets. By 2025, we’re deep inside the Plutoeconomy: a system where billionaires don’t just play the game, they own the rulebook. Elections, markets, even entire industries move at the twitch of a plutocrat’s eyebrow.

You don’t have to dig through academic papers to see it—you can scroll through the headlines.

What the Hell Is Plutoeconomy?

Plutoeconomy is what happens when wealth stops being a byproduct of capitalism and becomes the operating system itself. It’s plutocracy with a shiny app interface. A few thousand people—out of 8 billion—control flows of capital so large they make governments look like side hustlers.

In 2025, the top 1% controls nearly 46% of global wealth (Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report). The bottom half of humanity? They share less than 1%. That isn’t capitalism—it’s feudalism with better branding.

And the rules have shifted:

  • Wealth concentration is now designed, not accidental. From private equity hoarding housing stock to Big Tech swallowing AI startups before they breathe, it’s a fortress economy.
  • Speculation trumps production. In 2024, U.S. corporations spent $1 trillion on stock buybacks—more than on R&D. Wall Street cheered, workers didn’t.
  • Policy is drafted in boardrooms. In the U.S. alone, billionaires poured $2.2 billion into the 2024 elections, according to OpenSecrets. That’s not democracy—it’s investment with ROI measured in tax loopholes and deregulation.
Contenuto dell’articolo

Tech Titans: The New Shadow States

Plutoeconomy’s crown jewels are Big Tech. Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta—together worth over $10 trillion in market cap—aren’t just companies. They’re shadow states, controlling infrastructure, labor markets, even public debate.

  • Musk’s X: What used to be Twitter is now a geopolitical chessboard. A single algorithm tweak influences elections in Argentina or meme-stocks in New York. His Starlink satellites? They’re as critical to warfare as tanks.
  • Amazon: In 2025, it employs 1.5 million workers, yet fights unionization like it’s an existential threat. Its cloud arm, AWS, underpins governments and militaries. When Amazon sneezes, national economies catch a cold.
  • OpenAI & Sovereign Funds: Saudi Arabia and UAE have invested billions into generative AI labs. AI is no longer a Silicon Valley game—it’s a geopolitical weapon.

These players don’t disrupt industries; they set the boundaries of reality.

 

The Plutoeconomy doesn’t stop at markets—it rewires politics.

Trump’s 2024 comeback campaign was bankrolled by billionaires hedging regulatory favors. In Europe, oligarch-owned media outlets amplify nationalist narratives that protect fossil fuel investments.

In India, Adani’s conglomerate moves in lockstep with government priorities, blurring the line between state and shareholder.

This is the playbook:bankroll the politicians, write the rules, extract the value. Democracy becomes theater.

Policy becomes product design.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Social Bill Comes Due

All this billionaire engineering comes with a price tag:

  • Inequality on Steroids: By 2025, Oxfam estimates one billionaire emerges every 30 hours, while 60% of the world lives paycheck to paycheck.
  • Housing as Asset Class: Private equity firms like Blackstone own entire neighborhoods. Tenants don’t just rent from landlords—they rent from Wall Street.
  • Populist Blowback: Rising inequality fuels the anger that fuels populism. From the gilets jaunes in France to U.S. labor strikes in 2024, the backlash is real.
  • Market Fragility: The 2022 crypto implosion and 2024 VC collapse showed what happens when speculation replaces production: billion-dollar startups vanishing overnight.

Why It Matters Now

2025 feels like a tipping point. The Plutoeconomy has matured into a closed loop where wealth protects itself at all costs. Innovation is bought before it competes. Policy is sculpted to preserve dynasties. And consumers? They’re not customers—they’re data points, debtors, or collateral.

But here’s the kicker:systems this unbalanced don’t last.

History doesn’t repeat, but it rhymes. The Gilded Age birthed antitrust laws. The Great Depression birthed social safety nets. What will Plutoeconomy birth? Reform—or rupture.

The Plutoeconomy isn’t coming. It’s here.

And unless structural checks—progressive taxation, antitrust crackdowns, campaign finance reform—are enforced, it won’t just erode democracy. It will replace it.

For businesses, the choice is brutal but clear: play the billionaire game and risk capture, or carve a niche of independence before it’s too late.

Because in 2025, the market isn’t free. It’s franchised.

Until next time, stay sharp.

Alex

At Kredo Marketing, we help businesses cut through monopolized markets with independent, future-proof strategies. Let’s design a system that works for you—not for the billionaires.

ChatGPT Image 4 ago 2025, 10_16_19

Kill the Process

, , , ,

Hey workplace revolutionaries—

Imagine a company where no one needs permission to act. Where bureaucracy isn’t a ladder to climb, but a relic to discard. Where people matter more than processes.

Sounds idealistic? It’s already happening. Quietly. Boldly. Around the world.

Welcome to the era of Humanocracy.

Why we need a new model

Let’s face it: most companies today still run on managerialism—the belief that control, measurement and top-down structure are the keys to performance. But control doesn’t scale creativity. And measurement rarely fuels meaning.

The result? An epidemic of disengagement.

Gallup’s 2022 global workplace report showed that nearly 79% of employees are either not engaged or actively disengaged.

In Europe, that number is even worse.

Bureaucracy is draining energy, time, and life out of our organizations. A 2017 Harvard Business Review study estimated that organizational drag costs the US economy over $3 trillion annually in lost productivity.

What if we stopped managing people, and started unleashing them?

Contenuto dell’articolo

What is Humanocracy?

The term comes from Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini’s book Humanocracy, a manifesto for replacing corporate bureaucracies with people-first operating systems.

But it’s more than a management theory. It’s a rebellion against the industrial-age belief that humans are unreliable and need to be controlled by systems.

Humanocracy means:

  • Designing organizations around trust, not control
  • Letting teams self-organize, self-manage, self-correct
  • Recognizing that humans, not systems, create value

It doesn’t mean anarchy. It means responsibility without babysitting. It doesn’t mean no structure. It means structure that adapts to people, not the reverse.

 

Who’s doing it?

Haier (China)

This isn’t a trendy startup. It’s the world’s largest appliance company, with 80,000+ employees.

Under Zhang Ruimin, Haier broke itself into 4,000 autonomous micro-enterprises. Every unit sets its own goals, manages its own budget, and shares in the profits.

They eliminated most middle management roles. They built an internal platform economy before the term even existed.

Outcome? Revenue quadrupled. Time-to-market shrank from months to weeks. And employees? They feel like entrepreneurs.

Buurtzorg (Netherlands)

Founded by Jos de Blok in 2006, Buurtzorg reinvented home care by giving power back to nurses.

No call centers. No complex hierarchies. Just small self-managed teams (max 12 nurses) deciding how to serve their communities.

Result: higher client satisfaction, 30% lower costs for the Dutch health system, and virtually no burnout.

Buurtzorg’s motto? Humanity over bureaucracy.

NER Group (Spain)

A network of companies in Basque Country that share one radical rule: democracy at work.

Employees set salaries collectively. Leadership rotates. Profit is shared. Meetings are open. Financials are transparent.

The goal is not just economic performance—but dignity, equality, and joy at work.

This isn’t a co-op. These are for-profit, industrial companies outperforming their competitors.

But does it work?

Before we dive into the data, let’s give credit to one of the most important movements spreading this mindset: Corporate Rebels.

Founded by Joost Minnaar and Pim de Morree, Corporate Rebels is a global research and consulting project that started with a simple mission: visit the world’s most progressive workplaces and share what they learned. They’ve compiled insights from over 150 trailblazing companies, from Patagonia to Handelsbanken, and turned those lessons into a framework for radically human organizations.

They don’t just write about change. They help build it.

Yes. And not only in niche or creative sectors.

According to Corporate Rebels, which has documented dozens of progressive companies across the globe, humanocratic models consistently show:

  • 2–4x higher employee engagement
  • Lower absenteeism and turnover
  • Faster innovation cycles
  • Stronger customer loyalty

The key? Trust replaces surveillance. Purpose replaces compliance. Accountability flows sideways, not just downward.

And it turns out, people don’t need a boss to do their best work.

They need meaning.

Contenuto dell’articolo

What’s stopping us?

Fear.

Fear of losing control. Fear of being obsolete. Fear that without hierarchy, chaos will erupt.

But most chaos comes from hierarchy: miscommunication, bottlenecks, pointless meetings, corporate theater.

The irony? Bureaucracy feels safe, but it’s deeply fragile. It collapses under complexity. Humanocracy, on the other hand, is adaptive by design.

The bigger risk is to do nothing.

Humanocracy doesn’t mean anti-structure. It means pro-human. It invites us to rebuild organizations that reflect the messiness, brilliance and unpredictability of real people.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about being nice. It’s about being smart. When people are free to contribute fully, business grows stronger. Culture grows deeper. Work feels like something worth doing.

We don’t need more frameworks. We need more courage.

Let’s build companies that are as alive as the people who make them.

Until next time, stay free.

Alex

At Kredo, we help organizations design systems that empower people—not just control them.If you’re ready to kill the process and build real culture, let’s talk.

alexdevita0536_hyper-realistic_portrait_of_an_unrealistically_80b4626c-6635-4798-9f8d-2c3672547d08_1

Future Beauty Is Unreal — And Marketing Made It That Way

, , , , , , ,

Hey beauty hackers —

We didn’t just photoshop faces. We photoshopped reality. Then we called it aspiration.

And now, after decades of airbrushed perfection and Instagram-filtered lives, we’re entering the next stage: bioprinted skin, AI-optimized symmetry, and synthetic hormones that can boost your face for the algorithm.

It sounds like science fiction. But it’s happening. And worse: it feels normal.

Welcome to the era where beauty isn’t just unattainable.

It’s post-human.

Let’s get one thing straight: marketing didn’t invent beauty standards. But it industrialized them. Turned them into KPIs.

When I started out in the industry, I remember working with a skincare brand where we tested thirty shades of “natural” skin tones — and the more unrealistic, the better they performed. The final ads looked like portraits of aliens: smooth, glowing, uncanny.

“It pops on feed,” the creative director said.

It popped, alright. It also helped create the visual grammar of the uncanny beautiful — a style that now dominates TikTok, Instagram, and your cousin’s wedding reel.

We taught algorithms what beauty looked like. And now they’re teaching us back.

Neuroaesthetics and the Rise of AI-Optimized Beauty

Let’s talk science.

Neuroaesthetics shows that humans respond to certain proportions, color balances, and symmetry patterns in deeply emotional ways. We’re wired to crave beauty that calms us, excites us, or signals health.

But here’s the twist: AI can now generate faces that hit those neural sweet spots better than real faces do. Not idealized.

Optimized.

So what happens when beauty is no longer human, but computational? When filters become surgical? When influencers look like digital clones?

Answer: people start to feel like defects.

You see it in the data: rising demand for cosmetic tweaks in teenagers. TikTok filters with 700 million uses in two days. Clinics offering “AI face scans” to suggest enhancements.

Marketing doesn’t need to sell a product. It sells an improved self. And when that self is a neural composite of data, emotion, and fantasy — you get a generation chasing perfection against a non-human benchmark.

Case Study: Dove’s Real Beauty Commitment (2024)

Let’s look at a brand that chose to go radically against the trend.

In 2024, Dove celebrated 20 years of its Real Beauty campaign with a clear message: no AI-generated faces, no post-human perfection. Just real people. Their campaign featured portraits of women of all ages and backgrounds — pores, wrinkles, freckles and all — shot in natural light, with zero filters.

One of the key visuals featured a 53-year-old community teacher from Lisbon, wearing no makeup, laughing openly in front of a classroom of teenagers. The image went viral across Europe, with the hashtag #NoDigitalDistortion trending for days. Unilever, Dove’s parent company, reported a 24% increase in engagement across German and Scandinavian markets.

But the real victory? Gen Z’s reaction. Thousands of young users reposted the campaign with captions like “this is what my mom looks like” or “finally someone who looks like my aunt.”

It wasn’t nostalgia. It was relief.

Dove didn’t just promote a product — it reclaimed the visual language of beauty. And it proved that in a market saturated by synthetic aesthetics, authenticity doesn’t just break through. It leads.

The Psychology of Beauty Fatigue

Psychologists call it “aesthetic numbness.”

It’s what happens when your brain is pummeled with flawless faces, perfect product shots, and algorithmically curated feeds for too long. Like a song on repeat, beauty — when too consistent — becomes background noise. The first time you saw a filter that smoothed the skin and added sparkles, you probably noticed. By the hundredth time? You scroll right past it.

Years ago, I sat in a meeting with a creative director who insisted we use the same retouched lighting, soft-focus filters, and pastel palette across every campaign image. “Consistency sells,” he said. But by the end of the quarter, engagement was down 18%. People weren’t angry. They were just… gone. Eyes glazed over. Comments stopped. We’d optimized the life out of it.

The human brain is bored by perfection. It craves micro-tension — like a crooked smile, a surprising color palette, a wrinkle that says this person has lived. Neuromarketing studies have shown that the amygdala, our emotional processing center, responds more intensely to unpredictable or slightly asymmetric visual inputs than to sterile balance.

Simply put: we feel more when things aren’t quite right.

That’s why brands embracing imperfection aren’t just doing it for ethics or aesthetics. They’re doing it for engagement. A freckled model, an out-of-place strand of hair, even the reflection of a photographer in the mirror — these “errors” draw us in because they break the loop of visual monotony. They remind us there’s a human behind the lens.

And in a marketplace where attention is currency, disruption is value.

So What Do We Do?

Here’s the tiplist:

  1. Make realness visible — not as a campaign stunt, but as a long-term narrative.
  2. Audit your aesthetic defaults — are you choosing visuals that reflect reality or just reflect the algorithm?
  3. Champion narrative beauty — faces with stories last longer in memory.
  4. Design for trust, not just attention — beauty that looks good but feels fake is a liability.
  5. Reclaim the uncanny — if you use AI, make it surreal, not synthetic. Art, not lie.

and in the End…

The future of beauty is up for grabs.

We can either keep chasing the ultra-optimized self, defined by pixels and predictions. Or we can rehumanize beauty — one imperfection at a time.

The market is already shifting. What was once edgy now feels hollow. And what once felt raw now feels rare. That’s your cue.

Beauty isn’t disappearing. It’s mutating.

Let’s make sure it doesn’t lose its soul.

Until next time, stay uncanny.

Alex

Want to craft campaigns that stand out without selling out?

Kredo Marketing helps brands rediscover their truth — in strategy, in design, in storytelling.

Let’s make marketing feel human again.

22682

The Instagramification of Everything

, , , , ,

Hey feed-surfers—

Have you noticed how everything looks like it’s trying to be… liked?

Coffee shops. Book covers. Packaging. Logos. Even cities.

We’re living in the golden age of “Instagramification”—a culture where every object, product, and experience is filtered through the logic of the grid: sharp lines, muted colors, sans-serif fonts, and photogenic shadows. Aesthetics optimized for scrolling. Not for meaning.

And that’s a problem.

When Form Devours Function

Go to any newly opened café in Paris, Milan, or Düsseldorf. Chances are it features terrazzo countertops, arched mirrors, plants in clay pots, and just the right hue of beige. It’s not that it’s ugly—it’s that you’ve seen it a hundred times.

What used to be local flair has turned into global sameness. A kind of aesthetic monoculture. Architecture, once contextual and expressive, is now often guided by how good it looks in a reel. Just like food, furniture, hotel lobbies, and even churches.

The logic is clear: if it photographs well, it spreads well. If it spreads well, it converts.

But what are we losing in the process?

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Instagram Brain

Psychologically, this shift has deeper consequences than we think. Studies in cognitive neuroscience suggest that our brains are increasingly wired to favor pattern recognition over substance digestion.

That is: we scroll faster, we judge quicker, and we remember less.

This is especially problematic in marketing. When visual branding relies too heavily on surface trends, brands begin to blur. They become pretty but forgettable. Studies show that the average brand impression lasts less than 2 secondsin a social scroll.

If your brand looks like the last ten your user saw, congratulations—you don’t exist.

And there’s more.

A 2022 paper from the Journal of Consumer Psychology notes that overly aestheticized product design creates what researchers call “cognitive friction”—when form overshadows function, users feel confused, even anxious. They hesitate. They churn.

Contenuto dell’articolo

But… Who’s It For, Really?

This aesthetic obsession is also an economic paradox. A company spends months designing a new app interface, storefront, or brand campaign. It wins awards. It gets reposted. But it doesn’t sell more. Or worse, it alienates the audience that actually pays.

Because here’s the catch:not every user is on Instagram. And even among those who are, not everyone values the same visual codes. In trying to please the algorithm, many brands stop speaking to their core audience.

They start designing for designers.

This disconnect is not just theoretical. Look at the countless rebrands that backfire because they swapped character for “modernity.” Think Tropicana’s infamous packaging redesign in 2009, which led to a 20% drop in sales—roughly $30 million lost in a few weeks.

Why? Because the new design looked cleaner… but felt generic. Customers didn’t recognize it. So they didn’t buy it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

A Counter-Example: Vitsœ in Germany

Let’s stay in Europe.

Vitsœ , the German-British company that produces Dieter Rams’ modular shelving system, has resisted this aesthetic contagion. Their branding is borderline anti-Instagram: minimal but not trendy, calm but not sterile. Their website feels more like a personal letter than a showroom.

Yet they have a cult following. Not because they shout louder—but because they whisper consistently. Their whole ethos is long-term thinking: sustainability, timeless design, slow consumption. And customers respond. They don’t just buy a product—they buy into a philosophy.

This is key: when everyone else is screaming visuals, a clear voice cuts through.

So what’s the cost of aesthetic conformity?

In economic terms:wasted budget. High design costs, low return.

In psychological terms: decision fatigue, shallow engagement, short-lived loyalty. In strategic terms: a brand that can’t differentiate itself.

Brands need to stop designing for screenshots and start designing for resonance.

Because in the end, likes don’t equal loyalty.

Tips for De-Instagramifying Your Brand

Contenuto dell’articolo
  1. Audit your visuals — Does your website, packaging, or content look like a Pinterest board from 2021? Be honest.
  2. Reclaim your voice — What does your brand sound like? If you took away all visuals, could someone still recognize you?
  3. Design for use, not likes — Ask: does this asset help my user do something better? Or just look good?
  4. Stay rooted in your story — Before choosing a style, revisit your why. Aesthetics should express it, not replace it.
  5. Test with outsiders — Get feedback from people who aren’t designers or marketers. If they “get it,” you’re doing it right.

There’s nothing wrong with beauty.

But when everything is optimized for optics, we risk building a world of brands that look alive but feel empty.

So here’s a better goal: design things that matter in feeds and in minds.

Because your job isn’t to go viral. Your job is to be remembered.

Until next time, stay sharp.

Alex

Want to escape the scroll-driven marketing trap?

Let’s design strategies that actually stick. 👉 www.kredo-marketing.com

1751526576016

Corporate ADHD: Why Brands Can’t Focus (And Customers Can Tell)

, , , , , , , ,

Hey attention crash-testers—

Ever walked into a meeting with five priorities? Congratulations, you have zero.

Brands are burning out. Not because of lack of ambition — but because they can’t sit still. One quarter it’s Gen Z. The next it’s TikTok. Then it’s sustainability. Now it’s AI. And don’t forget NFTs, because someone’s cousin made a million with a pixelated llama.

We’re not iterating. We’re twitching.

And like a sleep-deprived intern juggling Slack, Zoom, and a boss yelling “BE MORE DISRUPTIVE,” brands are living through a full-blown attention crisis.

The result? Customers feel it. Employees drown in it. Strategy dies because of it.

The Corporate ADHD Epidemic

Let me tell you a story. A few years ago, I was consulting for a mid-sized fashion brand in Berlin. They called us in because “they wanted to rebrand.”

Classic.

But by week two, they weren’t sure if the priority was expanding their menswear line, launching a podcast, building a Roblox activation, or going full vegan.

I remember asking the CEO in a workshop, “What’s the one thing your customers come to you for?”

He paused. Looked around. Then said: “Aesthetics?”

It was a question.

This is how it always starts: with a loss of focus disguised as opportunity.

Their Instagram became a random mess of half-baked campaigns. They launched a capsule collection no one understood. Eventually, their loyal base started drifting. They weren’t angry — just… confused. Within 12 months, revenue was down 23%.

This is what happens when you confuse busyness with progress. When you chase everything, you dilute everything.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Illusion of Agility

Corporate ADHD hides behind words like “agile” and “fast-moving.” But real agility isn’t about reacting to every trend. It’s about knowing when not to.

A 2023 Deloitte report found that only 17% of brands that adopted “rapid pivot” strategies post-Covid saw long-term growth. The rest either plateaued or regressed. Why? Because in most cases, the pivot wasn’t rooted in strategy — it was panic rebranded as responsiveness.

Take CNN+. Remember that streaming service? Neither does anyone else. It launched in 2022. Died in 2022.

Why? Because CNN tried to play Netflix without understanding their own audience’s media habits. They mistook the content boom for a license to diversify, instead of asking the obvious: Do people want more CNN… or better CNN?

Case Study: Oatly’s Focused Weirdness

Now, let’s flip it.

Oatly is weird. Purposefully so. You might think of them as just “the oat milk brand with the loud packaging.” But behind the chaos is ruthless focus.

Their tone is eccentric, but consistent. Their messaging — from TV spots to carton sides — always reinforces the same identity: irreverent, plant-based, anti-corporate.

In 2020, they had a 70% market share in Sweden’s alt-milk category. Globally? They became a symbol of how to be everywhere without being everything.

Even when expanding into Asia, they didn’t dilute. Same fonts. Same humor. Same activist edge. That coherence makes them recognizable — and trustworthy. You don’t need to love oat milk to know what Oatly stands for.

That’s strategic focus. Not rigidity. Not sameness. Focus with personality.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Saying No

In 2022, I was working with a startup in the food tech scene — a scrappy team of twelve, great product, good energy. They’d just closed a decent seed round and were drunk on potential. At our kickoff meeting, the founder burst in late, phone still glued to his ear, and launched into a monologue:

“We want to expand into Germany, open a pop-up in London, relaunch the website, hire a Head of Brand, start a podcast, and explore a metaverse experience — oh, and maybe do something with NFTs.”

I remember blinking, sipping my lukewarm espresso, and saying, “Pick one. Then we’ll talk.”

They weren’t thrilled. They paused the project. I think the CMO even rolled his eyes.

Three months later, I got an email. Subject line: “We should’ve listened.”

The campaigns had flopped. Social was a ghost town. Developers were building two unfinished landing pages at once. Everyone was exhausted. They’d burned through half the budget, chasing noise over clarity.

It was a classic case of cognitive overload disguised as ambition. And saying no wasn’t just advice — it was the only act of strategic mercy I could offer.

Focus isn’t sexy. But it’s the only thing that scales.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Symptoms of Corporate ADHD

  • You’re launching five things and maintaining none
  • Your team is burned out but directionless
  • You’re on every social platform — but with no strategy
  • Quarterly goals shift monthly
  • No one can articulate your brand’s core narrative in one sentence

According to a 2024 PwC survey, 64% of marketing leaders say their biggest struggle is “too many simultaneous priorities.”

So How Do You Treat It?

Here’s the checklist. Stick it to your office wall:

  1. Define what you don’t do — Strategy is subtraction.
  2. Audit your narrative every quarter — Are you still telling the same story?
  3. Build fewer things, but finish them — Launch less. Land more.
  4. Reward long-term KPIs — Not just engagement spikes.
  5. Make ‘no’ a default option — Kill ideas fast. Before they become projects.

I’ll leave you with this.

A few years back, while consulting for a lifestyle brand drowning in half-launched projects, I remember sitting in a dim-lit boardroom covered with sticky notes. The walls screamed potential. But none of it stuck. Each note represented a “priority” — which, by definition, meant none really were. The founder looked at me, wide-eyed, and asked: “So… which one do you think we should go all in on?”

I replied: “Which one would still matter if TikTok disappeared tomorrow?”

Silence.

That’s what focus sounds like.

In a business culture that rewards noise, focus is an act of rebellion. It means resisting the dopamine hit of constant novelty. It means building something — slowly, consistently — until it matters. And it means having the courage to stay boring long enough for your audience to trust you.

Because customers don’t leave because you’re boring. They leave because you’ve lost the plot.

Until next time, stay grounded.

Alex

If your brand feels overwhelmed by too many ideas and zero clarity, we can help. At Kredo Marketing, we turn chaos into strategy — and ambition into results. Let’s talk before your audience drifts away.

Load More