The end of trends, what's next?

Everything's linked: A visualisation of the blogosphere

The few years has seen a boom in trendspotting, most noticeable in the shape of blogs as they are the ultimate way for trendspotters to reach out with ‘new news’. But have trendspotting finally reached its peak? 

The sheer abundance of “source” trend blogs, boosted by other social media, and the demand for trends have turned them into an omnipresent, realtime phenomena. Everyone is a producer and consumer of trends.

In this perfect information society, the trends seize to be trends in the sense that they lose their exclusivity: they are no longer part of the new and the latest, but part of the “now”.

If trends can no longer be seen as predictive or exclusive tools for getting ahead, they’re no longer useful for planners and marketers. If this is the case, maybe it’s time to stop following trends (which aren’t trends anymore) and start being original?

Comments

[fredrik sarnblad]

It's a great point you raise Leon and something I've also been hammering on about for a long time. 'Trends' these days are a lot like ads in my opinion: given that 99% if them are pointless and superficial, they're actually holding brands back rather than helping them get ahead.

[Magnus Lindkvist]

Strange entry, Leon.
You're using a very myopic and in my view erroneous definition of the word "trend".
A trend emerges when things/ideas/behaviour replicates - an integral part of humanity (just look at what you're wearing right now and you'll realize that most/all of it is copied from someone somewhere).
Furthermore, the "trends are dead - time to be original" thought is hardly new. It's been sold by many trendspotters in the past decades. This is based on the reactionary view that consumption is ultimately something evil (not just an economic description of the part of your capital you don't save) and needs to be fought.
Personally, I get truly inspired by many if the "new news" blogs you refer to here. Is your point that this inspiration is really an illusion and that I would be better off not reading them?

PS! I wrote a post about this a few days ago:
http://magnuslindkvist.vox.com/library/post/why-trends-will-never-die.html

[Leon]

The fact that a trend emerges when things/ideas/behaviour replicates is exactly my point. With 100% accessibility and assimilation, the half-life of trends go toward zero. Unlike the reactionary. The originality factor is hence not a political statement, but a strategy if competitive advantage is to be achieved. My perspective maybe myopic, but that's because it reflects the use of trendblogs as a planner's tool, not a source of inspiration. As you said, blogs are still inspirational.

[Magnus Lindkvist]

Hmm...
Your assumption is that because "trends" (with your definition of the word applying) are increasingly ubiquitous and omni-present, they
a) are never replicated
b) lose value as planner's tool
c) seize to be a source of competitve advantage
I disagree with all three claims.
Firstly, people will always copy an idea, a behavior, an insight, etc from somebody else. Different people use different sources but that hardly makes "trends" obsolete.
Secondly, a lazy planner who has relied primarily on trendwatching.com to do the job for him/her will be in trouble anyway with a shaky economy without me telling them that raw infomration has never been and will never be a tool or a competitive advantage. With your often insightful blog, Leon, you know as well as I that information needs to be filtered through that wonderful organ known as brain to be useful. "Trend" blogs are terrific as inspirational tools but in no way a substitute for thinking by yourself. I pity the planners who though otherwise and wish them the best of luck in their post-downturn career.

[Leon]

I don't think that my argument is odd or unfounded. To me it's rather clear that the trend market due to digital media has become exactly like the news market = commoditized.

Nor do I think that there's one planner that solely relies on Trendwatching.com etc.

What I think that most planners are faced with are time constraints on finding "power insights" that will make their work more effective and creative. Looking where everybody else is looking is a bad research strategy for creating unique work.
This maybe seem obvious, but look at car advertising as an example. Car ads look very much the same, because they are all based on the same research information.

It often happens that ads from totally different categories can look exactly the same, because they are based on the same kind of thinking (and by smart people), although their input may vary.

There are other and better places to look for insights: observing humans and their behaviour for example. To base planning and creative work on truly unique information will give you a much more robust platform than a metastudy of what has already happened in the market.

I think Fredrik summarises it well when he draws the parallell between trends and ads. To make unique ads it's seldom a good idea to get "inspired" from other ads. That will totally restrict that wonderful brain that we're talking about.