Hey gang,

We are absolutely flying through the summer. We officially announced our expansion into Germany to bring our tech comms model to continental Europe, and over in London, we are growing the bench with Ségolène joining as our new Director and Ruvina stepping up as Deputy MD. If that wasn't enough international action, we also just dropped a must read piece on why crossing the Atlantic demands a narrative shift for European tech brands looking to scale, alongside the launch of our brand new Inflection whitepaper to help brands see around corners. Honestly, between conquering Europe, expanding our leadership bench, and dropping fresh research, we are practically running a masterclass in global scale.

Speaking of international expansion, navigating new territory always comes down to how you tell your story. Whether you are a European scaleup trying to adopt high-conviction US messaging, a legacy brand like Dollar Shave Club using AI to double down on its original voice, or Farmers Insurance going completely pink to stand out in a dull category, distinctiveness is the ultimate business strategy. In this edition, we are looking closely at what it takes to escape the sea of sameness, why the EU is shifting from policing social media content to cracking down on the addictive mechanics of engagement, and how to build a brand voice that actually survives the age of automation.

Let's get into it.

Becky and Greg

Dollar Shave Club is using generative AI to sound more like itself, not less

The grooming brand is leaning on AI for ad creative while working to protect the irreverent voice that built it.

TL;DR: Dollar Shave Club's chief brand and innovation officer, Laura Higgins, described how the company is expanding its use of generative AI in advertising creative — including a recent Fourth of July campaign — and framing it as a way to reassert the brand's distinctive voice rather than dilute it.

Takeaway: The notable move here isn't that a brand is using AI; everyone is. It's that Dollar Shave Club is positioning AI as a tool to protect brand voice, not to cut costs. That's the more durable stance. Cost-savings stories invite commoditization; voice-protection stories keep a brand recognizable once everyone has the same tools. In an era where production is nearly free, the advantage shifts to the brands with a voice worth preserving.

Consider:

• For marketers, if AI makes production nearly free, what is the thing only your brand can say — and are you briefing AI to protect it or flatten it?

• For communications leaders, where in your content pipeline does AI speed genuinely help, and where does it quietly erode the voice audiences recognize?

Farmers Insurance goes all-in on pink to escape the "sea of sameness"

In a category where everyone looks alike, a bold color and a tweaked jingle are doing real strategic work.

TL;DR: Farmers Insurance unveiled its first major brand refresh in years: a pink-forward visual identity and a reworked take on its long-running jingle. Leaders described the effort as a way to stand out in an insurance category the brand itself calls a "sea of sameness."

Takeaway: Distinctiveness is a strategy, not decoration. In low-interest categories like insurance, the job isn't to explain features better than rivals — it's to be instantly recognizable. Committing to one ownable color while protecting an existing asset like the jingle is textbook distinctive-asset thinking. The usual failure point isn't the idea; it's nerve, when companies water down the bold choice after the first round of internal pushback.

Consider:

• For marketers, what is the one asset you could commit to hard enough that competitors can't credibly follow — and what's stopping you?

• For communications leaders, when the refresh lands, is the internal story strong enough that employees defend the bold choice instead of apologizing for it?

The EU tells Meta to fix "addictive" design — or pay

Regulators are moving from policing content to policing the mechanics of engagement itself.

TL;DR: The European Union said Meta must overhaul "addictive" design features on Facebook and Instagram or face fines, finding the company in breach of EU rules. The action targets the engagement-driving mechanics of the platforms rather than any specific piece of content.

Takeaway: This is a meaningful shift: regulators are no longer only arguing about what gets posted, but about how platforms are engineered to keep people scrolling. For any brand whose reach depends on these platforms, the terms of engagement could change — the very features marketers rely on may be redesigned to be less sticky. It also raises a quieter reputational question about how comfortable brands are being adjacent to mechanics regulators are now calling harmful.

Consider:

• For marketers, if platform engagement mechanics get dialed down by regulation, how much of your reach is built on borrowed — and possibly temporary — virality?

• For communications leaders, where do your own "engagement" tactics sit on the line between compelling and manipulative, and could you defend them in public?

Like what you're reading? Forward this to a friend and have them sign up here!