The Fragmentation of Fitting In
What marketers get wrong about individuality in consumer culture
We scroll furiously through TikTok, demystify the trends circulating among teenagers and convince ourselves that self-expression reigns supreme. Words like personal, authentic, and individual pepper our assessments of contemporary culture.
When the term “selfie” spiked on Google Search in 2014, the New York Times heralded The Age of Individualism and NPR analyzed how Millennials were uniquely empowered to be the “me-generation.” Today, trend reports declare that Gen Z is brand-agnostic and embraces individuality in shopping choices, while countless think-pieces unpack the rising salience of personal identity and individualism.
Marketers, we tell ourselves, must understand the human need for creative self-expression. Because people these days — they’re individuals.
While it’s true that we’re all more wary of filters and algorithms than ever (and I’ve written more about that here), our conviction that consumers are allergic to conformity raises a red flag. Is this just another example of the marketer’s empathy delusion?
The term empathy delusion was coined in a 2019 white paper by Reach, a newsbrand publisher in the UK, which compared the values of professional marketers to the UK’s general population.
The study found that people in the advertising industry value binding ethical foundations like in-group loyalty significantly less than the general public. In a related experiment, they found the same marketers more likely to let their intuition and sense of identity impact interactions with people who don’t share their views.
The report goes on to argue that these fundamental differences make marketers less capable of deep consumer understanding than we fancy ourselves to be. While I don’t draw such a dire conclusion, I think there’s a disconnect here that our industry need to face head on:
Most marketers want to stand out. But most people want to fit in.
The audience you’re reaching may over-index on wanting to stand out in a crowd. But look closer at how many of them actually agree with that statement. It’s smaller than you think. Outside the creative class, social belonging reigns over self-expression.
So what’s the shift toward individualism that we think we see?
What looks like increased individual expression is a symptom of social fragmentation. Party polarization has risen steadily since the 1940s. The wealth gap has risen steadily since the 1970s. Mass-appeal box office smash-hits are less common in the age of streaming’s endless scroll. The ever-astute Ana Andjelic argues that there will never again be an iconic item like Air Jordans. As she writes, “our concepts of “cool” and “iconic” are forged in the intimacy of our own taste communities.”
But while we’re less-centralized, we’re more consolidated. Our taste communities may be intimate, but they’re tight-knit and specific: evidence of our need to belong. They don’t mean that people are broadly wired toward standing out. Quite the opposite. They’re proof that “fitting in” is more precise than ever.
One needs only to look at @starterpacksofnyc on Instagram to see how this manifests even among creative types known for their cultural savvy. Though there are sub-groups, there are signals, unspoken rules, and ways to fit in.
All these trends popping up across social aren’t a product of bold individuality. They’re a sign that people are following the norms of their sub-cultures. Here’s the nuance that resonates with me: At the end of the day, people still want their style to reflect their feeds. Their feeds just look more distinct than ever.
Fellow advertising-folk, don’t confuse cultural fragmentation for deep-set individuality. The people we’re marketing to are looking to belong — and deep down, we probably are, too.
