Old brands weren’t built for trust

Americans Trust

This chart has me wondering if the nature of what makes a good brand has changed. Nowadays consumers want authentic brands that they trust have their back. Younger and tech savvy brands like Paypal, Amazon, Google and Apple have the culture and the understanding to give consumers what they want, whilst older brands like the banks shown above find it much more difficult.

We see a similar phenomenon in UK politics where followers of newer parties like the SNP and UKiP trust their politicians and are seemingly more loyal than followers of the Conservative and Labour parties.

Going back 30-40 years or more brands were built by buying media and controlling the airwaves, but the social media revolution has revealed the brittleness of this approach. The billion dollar question now is whether these old brands can adapt to live in the new world. Change like that is tricky, especially in regulated industries.

In politics I hope that the old brands can adapt. In business I hope not.

  • Steven Hess

    Brands exist to represent credentials and lineage that create a sense of trust. Think cattle and branding irons. In modern marketing you used to be able to buy it, now you have to earn it. Ironically, TV still has a powerful effect and can be more persuasive as a medium than online. It’s just easier today to bust myths.

  • Nathan Schor

    Coincidentally I’m just reading this great book which addresses exactly this topic, including many examples of the demise of brands that don’t stay ‘fresh’ (as opposed to those who damage themselves by always trying to be ‘new’).

    Brand: It ain’t the logo* (*It’s what people think of you) by
    Ted Matthews and Andris Pone

  • http://www.theequitykicker.com brisbourne

    That’s great. I also like ‘A great brand is a great promise delivered’.