Brand authenticity: Lessons learned from the Victoria’s Secret fashion show revival
The Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show is back. Once solely based around an “unattainable fantasy,” the annual show has returned after a six-year hiatus, with the goal of rebranding itself as a champion of inclusivity and diversity.
Known for bouncy blowouts, elaborate and expensive costumes, angel wings and unrealistic beauty standards, the annual fashion show was cancelled in 2019 due to public criticism and declining ratings. Viewers began to feel that the show promoted a culture of not only body image issues, but misogyny.
Last week, the fashion show made its grand reentrance into the public eye. With a new female CEO, Hillary Super, at the helm, the event promised the same glamorous performance but reflective of “who the brand is today” to be more inclusive and correct previous mistakes. The 2024 show certainly included diverse models, so why didn’t it work in the court of public opinion?
Takeaways
Many viewers have pointed out that clothing worn by size-inclusive models on the runway are only available for purchase in straight sizes online, or that those same models were purposely styled in more modest clothing – leaving them with the unshakable feeling that the brand doesn’t actually care.
Consumers today value authenticity above anything else – according to LinkedIn, 88% of consumers say it’s key when choosing brands to support. When it comes to the new VS show, viewers are calling it “tokenistic” and “muddled.”
If Victoria’s Secret’s fashion show revival has proven one thing, it’s that the defining line between authentic and performative can be found by listening to what customers truly want.
@staleyinsight This is coming from love @Victoria’s Secret #victoriassecret #victoriassecretfashionshow #tyla #fyp ♬ Fashion Show – Sunny Vibes
Welcome to ‘chaos packaging’
A recent Wall Street Journal article “Ice-Cream Tubs of Tampons and Sunscreen From a Whipped-Cream Can: Welcome to ‘Chaos Packaging’” highlights a growing trend among disruptor brands dubbed “chaos packaging.” Essentially, these lesser-known brands are using unexpected packaging (like selling sunscreen in whipped-cream cans, or gin from motor oil canisters) to break through and grab customer attention.
Takeaways
With shopper attention spans dwindling to mere seconds (or less!), be it in-aisle or online, brands are trying everything and anything to stand out from the competition. While this latest trend is the use of unexpected packaging, the use of “weird” in marketing is far from new.
Just off the top of my head, I can vividly recall dozens of examples of weird ads (which maybe makes me weird?) such as: Wendy’s 1984 “Where’s the Beef”; anything from Old Spice in the last 15 years; Cadbury’s “In the Air Tonight” gorilla; Coinbase’s QR code Super Bowl ad; or a personal favorite in my house, the Starburst Berries & Cream “Little Lad” campaign. These efforts all shared a singular goal: grab attention. And this lesson is applicable across all industries. Yes, even you, B2B!
Grabbing attention and making a lasting impression has always and will always be the key to marketing success.
@meredithduxburyA WHIPPED SUNCREEN… WHAT??? 🤯🤯🤯♬ original sound – Meredith Duxbury
News outlets sue Perplexity AI for allegedly engaging in ‘massive freeriding’
Perplexity AI, a search engine powered by generative AI, is facing lawsuits from major news outlets, including Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. The lawsuit alleges that Perplexity is illegally scraping content from the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, and other publications to train its AI models, diverting traffic from these publishers. Perplexity is also accused of repurposing copyrighted material without compensation, essentially profiting from content created by others. This lawsuit is part of a broader concern in the news industry over AI tools using unlicensed material to generate answers for users without driving traffic to the original content sources. Other publishers, such as The New York Times, have also sent cease-and-desist letters, accusing Perplexity of similar violations.
Takeaways
This is a reminder for PR professionals to be cautious when using generative AI tools like Perplexity. The tools we love for speed and convenience can pose ethical and legal risks, especially if they’re scraping and misusing data without permission. Lesson number one: don’t input confidential data into these platforms. You never know where or how it will be used, and we need to protect our clients’ sensitive information. Second, double-check the accuracy of any AI-generated content. As WIRED uncovered, Perplexity not only repurposes content but also “hallucinates” or creates completely inaccurate information. Finally, there’s a bigger issue of protecting copyright. We need to be responsible in how we engage with AI, advocating for ethical practices that respect intellectual property. Hop on trends, sure—but make sure you’re not putting your brand (or clients) at risk by embracing a tool that’s operating in murky legal territory.
Want more updates like these? Follow us on LinkedIn, X and Instagram for our weekly rundown.