 |
|
|
|||||
Chevrolet’s latest splashy ad has all the hallmarks of a campaign strategically tied to Americas 250th anniversary. Theres the modern interpretation of a 75-year-old jingle thats sung by an up-and-coming country singer. A birds-eye view of a pickup truck atop a natural landmark in Utah. A television debut on February 6 during the opening ceremony for the Winter Olympics. In every choice, Chevrolet is carving out friendly, apolitical terrain at a moment when Americans have mixed feelings about such patriotism. A record-low 58% of U.S. adults say they are extremely or very proud to be American, according to a Gallup survey from last year. Thats down 9 percentage points from 2024. It feels like modern patriotism has to walk a fine line between celebrating what’s great about America but also being careful not to anchor to just glib symbols and slogans that potentially could be dividing or polarizing, Paul Frampton-Calero, CEO of digital marketing agency the Goodway Group, tells Fast Company. A calendar built for America250 The United States SemiquincentennialAmerica250, A250, Quarter Millenniumwhatever one would like to call it, may be too enticing for marketers to ignore. This years calendar is overstuffed with holidays like Independence Day and Memorial Day, as well as major sporting events like the Winter Olympics and the FIFA World Cup, which align nicely with patriotism. There’s just a little bit more attention on America, American pride, and what the Olympics spirit is about, Steve Majoros, Chevrolets chief marketing officer, tells Fast Company. Throughout 2026, Chevrolet will revisit some of the auto brands classic campaigns and update them with a modern interpretation that coincides with major American moments, including the beginning of the baseball season this spring and Independence Day. Brands rush in, politics close behind The allure of the semiquincentennial has led large corporations including Amazon, Coca-Cola, and Cracker Barrel to sponsor the bipartisan America250 initiative, which is planning programming to promote the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Patriotism is also a major theme in Budweisers Super Bowl campaign called American Icons, starring a galloping Clydesdale and flying bald eagle as Free Bird by Lynyrd Skynyrd roars in the background. But Americas anniversary was also the focus of a traditional values marketing campaign promoting faith and marriage between a husband and wife funded by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. That spot aired during the NFL playoffs. A generational divide in American pride The Gallup poll showed less U.S. pride among Democrats and even some independents, which may not be a surprise given that the Republican Party fully controls all branches of government in Washington, D.C. But there could also be a generational divide that brands may need to consider when activating around America250. When contextual advertising platform Chicory surveyed 1,000 U.S. consumers last month, it found that while 58% of Americans plan to celebrate the nations anniversary, enthusiasm was far weaker for younger adults. There’s a lot more hesitation within the Gen Z cohort, Yuni Baker-Saito, cofounder and CEO of Chicory, tells Fast Company. The risk calculus for CMOs Marketers who opt into messaging that celebrates the birth of the nation will largely aim to avoid wading too far into cultural war controversies that sparked boycotts and fiery criticism for marketing initiatives from Bud Light, American Eagle, and Cracker Barrel. Americans are divided on whether they want corporate entities to weigh in on political or social issues, and CEOs are also wary. Target and Starbucks have been perennial targets for right-leaning activists for their more left positioning. But as they have moved to carve out more central and moderate corporate identities, both retailers have also angered more liberal-leaning consumers who have also called for boycotts. Risk-averse CMOs will have to be thoughtful about every creative decision they make for any patriotism-themed ads this year. The board wakes up when choosing the wrong ad, the wrong song, or the wrong talent, says Frampton-Calero. He believes that Chevrolets classic branding, which is frequently anchored in freedom of the moment, family, and road trips, avoids polarization. I think theyre quite a good example of staying on the right side of patriotism that connects into personal, collective well-being that resonates to an American, Frampton-Calero adds. Nostalgia as a safe bridge Nostalgic elements of Chevrolets See the USA in your Chevrolet include a song first performed by actress and singer Dinah Shore on her namesake TV variety show. The new version is sung by country artist Brooke Lee. Most new viewers wont make the connection to the old reference, but according to the company, it ties into the brands musical lineage. Chevrolet or Chevy has been name-checked in more than 1,000 songs, including Tim McGraw by Taylor Swift. Airlifting a 2026 Chevrolet Silverado ZR2 to the top of Castle Rock in Utah for the ad spot is also a nod to two of the brands past campaigns, when it put a Chevy Impala atop the 400-foot rock in TV and print advertisements that aired in 1964 and 1973. From left: Stills from Chevrolet advertisements in 1964 and 1973 [Images: Chevrolet] Universal values, global appeal Majoros says Chevrolets patriotic-forward campaign rests on universal themes that most Americans can agree on, including hard work, hope, optimism, opportunity, building families, communities, neighborhoods, and creating memories. Many of those values also surface in research thats conducted in markets ranging from China to South America. The brands current slogan, Together lets drive, is also intentional wording that allows Chevrolet to step to the side of that divisiveness,” he adds. When asked about the Gallup poll, Majoros sees opportunity. That means theres 42% of people who are thirsty to connect to something and who want to be pat of something, he says. The majority of people probably fall in that big, huge middle. If we can be the kind of a brand that speaks to the things that people are thinking aboutand longing forI think that number would be much higher.
Category:
E-Commerce
After more than two decades as a psychosexual therapist, I have learned to listen carefully for what people are not saying. When vulnerability is close to the surface, uncertainty shows up quickly. Am I doing this right? Do I belong here? What am I allowed to ask for, and what will it cost me if I do? At its core, psychosexual therapy is not really about sex. It is about how humans relate when the stakes are high, when power is present, and when much of what matters remains unspoken. It is about noticing how meaning is made in moments of vulnerability and choosing how to respond rather than react. What continues to surprise me is how familiar these same dynamics feel when I step into boardrooms, leadership teams, and global organizations as a social psychologist. The context changes. The language becomes more polished. But the relational patterns remain strikingly consistent. Over years of working across more than forty countries, I came to realize that my clinical work and my leadership work were asking the same essential question: how do humans make meaning together when the cues are subtle and the consequences matter? Our jobs are rarely just jobs anymore. Many of us are seeking purpose, belonging, and fulfillment beyond a financial transaction. This is where I often see a widening gap between traditionally informed organizations and leadership styles, and those that have evolved alongside shifting sociocultural norms. We talk a great deal about generational differences. What if instead we looked at work through a relational lens? I am often described as a relationship architect. My work is about helping people make sense of their relational spaces so they can direct their energy, attention, time, and resources to where they actually bear fruit. Through this lens, I have come to see that thriving relationships, whether in the bedroom or the boardroom, are built on the same six fundamental ingredients. 1. Respect Respect is often misunderstood as politeness, obedience, or walking on eggshells. In intimate relationships, respect looks like keeping the other persons priorities in mind, honoring boundaries, including your own, and practicing what I call the platinum rule: not treating others how you want to be treated, but how they want to be treated. In professional life, respect shows up in much the same way. It is reflected in how leaders honor boundaries around time, attention, and capacity. It appears when managers understand that what motivates one team member may exhaust another. Cultures of respect are built through everyday actions, arriving on time, being fully present, and not being distracted by a phone call in the middle of a conversation. 2. Trust Trust, in both intimate and professional relationships, is built through reliable and consistent actions repeated over time. Trust allows people to relax, to be vulnerable enough so connections could form, and to take risks. This looks like doing what you say you will do, taking accountability when you cannot, and repairing when things go off course. It means saying yes only when you can follow through, and saying no early rather than offering a lingering maybe. At work, trust functions the same way. Teams trust leaders who show up predictably and communicate clearly. Trust erodes when expectations shift without explanation or when people feel they must stay guarded. In organizations, low trust quietly taxes performance. People spend more time managing risk and protecting themselves than doing their best work. Over time, this shows up in burnout and avoidable turnover. 3. Attraction Attraction is often reduced to chemistry, but in reality it is about reciprocity and choice. In intimate relationships, attraction grows when people feel wanted and when there is space to be seen and chosen again and again. Attraction can take many forms, intellectual, emotional, social, physical, or financial. In professional settings, attraction shows up as engagement. Why do people want to be in the room? Why do they choose to stay with an organization or lean into a project? Leaders often underestimate how much attraction shapes retention. When attraction is absent, organizations rely on incentives. When it is present, people stay because they feel drawn to the work, the purpose, and the people. 4. Loving behavior Loving behavior is not about romance. It is about how we make others feel. In intimate relationships, it includes making the other person feel seen, special, and given the benefit of the doubt. It often means responding with generosity rather than suspicion when something goes wrong. At work, loving behavior translates into psychological safety. It shows up when leaders assume positive intent, acknowledge effort, and recognize unique contributions. People are more willing to stretch and innovate when mistakes are met with curiosity rather than punishment and they think their contribution is unique and it matters. 5. Compassion Compassion is often confused with empathy, but they are not the same. Empathy is feeling with another. Compassion is staying present without making the other persons experience about yourself. In intimate relationships, compassion allows partners to witness each others struggles without collapsing into them or turning away. In leadership, compassion means to be there for the other in a meaningful way. Leaders who can hold space for difficulty without over relating or becoming defensive are better able to guide teams through uncertainty and change. 6. Shared vision Finally, shared vision gives relationships direction. In intimate relationships, it helps couples navigate priorities, negotiate and compromise intentionally, and make sacrifices that feel meaningful rather than resentful. In organizations, shared vision determines where resources go, how decisions are made, and what success looks like. Without it, teams may work hard while pulling in different directions. With it, even difficult choices feel coherent and strategic rather than personal. The architecture of effective human systems What I have learned, sitting with couples and working with leaders across cultures, is that relationships do not thrive by accident. Across every context I have worked in, the relationships that truly thrive share these six foundations. They are not optional and they are not interchangeable. Respect, trust, attraction, loving behavior, compassion, and shared vision are the conditions that allow people to bring their full capacity into a shared space. When they are missing, no amount of strategy or incentive can make up for it. The bedroom and the boardroom are not as far apart as we like to think. Both are spaces where power, vulnerability, and belonging are negotiated. These are not soft skills. They are the architecture of effective human systems. At the end of the day, the way we do one relationship is the way we do them all.
Category:
E-Commerce
Over the past two years, a troubling trend has started to take shape in the media; for a large majority of journalists, DEI framing became the default for covering Black businesses. What should be stories about innovation, resilience, market disruption, and leadership have increasingly been flattened into a single, repetitive narrative: DEI. Not the company’s business model. Not the founders vision or entrepreneur journey. Not the problem being solved or the customers being served. Just DEI. And its often framed through the lens of rollbacks, political backlash, or cultural controversy. This didnt begin overnight, but in recent years and especially amid the political climate shaped by the Trump administration, it has accelerated to the point of absurdity. Today, if a business is Black-owned, media coverage almost reflexively treats it as a DEI case study rather than a company. The founder becomes a symbol, success becomes secondary, and the story becomes predictable before the first paragraph is even finished. One Narrative, Over and Over Again If you listen closely to news interviews from 2024 until now between reporters and Black founders, nine times out of ten a pattern quickly emerges. The questions sound eerily similar. How are DEI rollbacks affecting your business? What does the current political climate mean for Black entrepreneurship? How do you feel about corporate pullbacks from diversity initiatives? My company, Brennan Nevada Inc. New York Citys first and only Black-owned tech PR agency, has been able to witness this firsthand through my daily interactions and interviews with members of the media. Ive prioritized spending more time and conducting the necessary due diligence that preps my clients on how to engage, navigate, or just not participate in the same DEI obsessed interview. With these interviews between journalists and Black founders, the most important questions often go unasked, like What problem does this business solve? Or What makes it competitive? How did the founder build it? And What lessons can other entrepreneurs learn from its success? And when coverage does come out, it typically leads with the current administrations DEI rollbacks, and less like profiles of thriving companies. The rhetoric reflects commentary on diversity politics, with the business itself serving as a backdrop rather than the subject. When Black-Owned Becomes a Category, Not a Credential The underlying issue is subtle but very damaging: Black-owned has become synonymous with DEI in media framing. That equation is flawed and needs to be reworked. A Black-owned business is not inherently a diversity initiative or a political statement. It is first and foremost a business built by someone who just so happens to be Black. Thats it. Yet most media coverage today increasingly suggests that Black success exists primarily within the context of diversity efforts, and worse, that it is somehow dependent on them. When DEI programs face scrutiny or rollbacks, Black businesses are often portrayed as collateral damage rather than as resilient enterprises capable of thriving on merit, strategy, and execution. This framing does a disservice not only to Black founders, but to readers and audiences as well. It robs them of real business insight and reinforces the idea that Black success must always be explained through an external lens. The media tends to shift its tone to whats currently happening in the cultural moment, especially when towards Black businesses. Five years ago during George Floyds murder and the Black Lives Matter movement that happened around Juneteenth in 2020, the media positively highlighted a lot more Black businesses alongside brands that pushed for DEI to address systemic barriers. The Cost of Poor Storytelling This media obsession with DEI is getting old really fast. It reduces complex entrepreneurial journeys into political soundbites. And it quietly undermines the credibility of Black founders by implying that their success is inseparable from institutional support rather than personal vision and capability. Im not saying this is being done on purpose, because even well-intentioned coverage can fall into this trap, and oftentimes does. When every story leads with race rather than results, representation becomes reductive instead of empowering. The irony is that truly compelling stories are being missed. There are Black founders building category-defining products, solving real-world problems, scaling companies, and creating jobs; stories that deserve the same depth and seriousness afforded to any other entrepreneur. But those stories require more work. They require curiosity beyond a headline. They require journalists to move past the easiest narrative available. Whats Next for Black Stories in 2026 As media organizations reassess their role in shaping public discourse, 2026 presents an opportunity for a long-overdue reset. What would it look like to cover Black businesses the same way we cover all businesses, by focusing on innovation, leadership, and success first? What if founders were allowed to be experts in their industries rather than spokespeople for diversity debates? What if success stories were told as success stories? None of this means ignoring race or pretending systemic inequities dont exist. Thats not what Im saying since that context absolutely matters. But its my belief that context should inform a story not consume it. A Black-owned business should not automatically trigger a DEI narrative. And Black entrepreneurship should not be treated as a subplot in a political storyline. If the media wants to tell better stories in 2026, it needs to start by asking Black founders better questions, and by remembering that Black businesses are not symbols. We are enterprises. We are innovations. And we deserve to be covered as such.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||