POWER PLAY: GAMING’S ROLE IN SUBVERTING EDUCATION

Standing before the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his legendary “I Have Dream” speech to 250,000 people gathered on the National Mall. Now, almost sixty years later, 350 million people worldwide can experience a recreation of that moment thanks to Fortnite, one of the world’s most popular video games.

Fortnite, through a partnership with Time Magazine, is giving its players the opportunity to virtually watch the speech together, explore parts of 1963 Washington D.C., visit digital museums, and participate in activism mini-games inspired by the Civil Rights movement.

It’s early days yet, but so far the game, dubbed “March Through Time”, has been nothing if not controversial. Many, for instance, complained about players being able to use Fortnite’s “emote” function, which lets their avatars gesture and do dance moves. In short, hardly appropriate for such serious subject matter. Credit Fortnite, then, for quickly addressing that by disabling many of these questionable functions in the game mode. Still, there’s no easy fix for the concern that children will now associate Dr. King more with the game than activism. Nor is there a way for Fortnite to fully replicate the context, experience and impact of the original “I Have a Dream” speech. Fair comment. Nevertheless, argue the game’s advocates, after all we’ve been through in 2021 and all the technology now available, does it really need to?

Time was we’d generally turn to museums, libraries, schools and other institutions of learning to fill in the civic education blanks. But the plain fact is, depending on where you live and who’s doing the teaching, we’re not all on equal footing. Moreover, in the U.S., states have significant say over what children learn, and it is common for history to be revised and facts left out to serve individuals’ or communities’ ideas of morals and ethics. For the most part, that sort of curriculum has never painted a complete picture of history, often favoring exciting or romanticized narratives while hiding painful, ugly truths.

Enter gaming. Because gaming exists outside the bubble of cultural institutions and educational platforms, it is immune to many of their faults. In an opinion piece for Bloomberg.com on the distinctions between gaming and the greater world of culture, George Mason University economics professor Tyler Cowen writes that due to the insular nature of gaming: “It is easy to become a world-class performer in a game without knowing much about the broader culture. By the same token, most of today’s cultural experts know very little about gaming, and they get on just fine.”

That autonomy, free from personal or geographic biases, positions gaming as an option and resource for users who lack or don’t have access to the wider knowledge traditional learning institutions offer. For those school-age gamers, this sense of escape offers them new paths to explore and, even more, the prospect of new online communities with whom to do it. Such prospects give gaming platforms an effectiveness, scale and reach that mainstream educators can only dream about. As Cowen puts it, “gaming is more like participating in an event than watching an event.”

Fortnite’s MLK experience has so much value precisely because it works as an educational first step and conversation starter for many who otherwise may never have been exposed to or creatively engaged with the civil rights movement and its importance in our nation’s history. While users aren’t participating in the actual event that inspired the platform, they are sharing and participating in an interactive experience hard to replicate in the real world. For all the social media brickbats that have been hurled at “March Through Time”, many parents have chimed in that their children, after playing the game, wanted to talk to them and learn more about Dr. King.

Mission accomplished

Gaming’s foray into positive social impact isn’t necessarily new. In the summer of 2020 Fortnite itself hosted a roundtable discussion on race. Minecraft, another popular game, hosts “The Uncensored Library” — a safekeep built by Reporters without Borders that houses news and articles banned in countries without freedom of the press. Another important point Professor Cowen raises is the capacity of games to fight back against government regulation. In games, rules are set and enforced by creators and players, essentially allowing for innovation and new ways of thinking that government oversight might prevent. That’s a valuable resource to have, indeed, when tackling how to shake up a system as large and essential as education.

For years, gaming has been put down as a negative contributor to a plethora of social and health issues. But it turns out many of those who complain the loudest about it really understand it the least. While gaming may exist on the fringes of culture, it commands massive audiences equal to or greater than traditional media’s top performers. What Fortnite and others in effect are doing is exploring the capacity of gaming’s greatest asset, its power.

Malcolm X, the Civil Rights leader and contemporary of Dr. King, once said: “Power never takes a back step — only in the face of more power.” In the spirit of that sentiment, then, rather than critique Fortnite for exploring new territory with “March Through Time”, let’s instead applaud its creators for seeking how to use gaming’s power as a tool for progress — leveraging its reach to challenge, knock down and hopefully evolve traditional educational systems that all too often use their power to hold us back.

CONTRARIAN VIEWPOINTS NO LONGER CUT IT

As a studio that prides itself on embodying a contrarian spirit unafraid to question it all, we constantly challenge and explore the many angles of our approach to design, strategy, the clients we choose to work with, and staffing. Our non-traditional team is made up of folks of all ages and backgrounds — from both inside and outside the industry — who have taken unique paths to join us and bring unique points of view to the table.

But lately, as so much continues to rapidly move in seemingly wrong directions, it’s become clear that our contrarian viewpoint no longer cuts it. While it was a fresh new take when our studio was founded, these days that’s no longer the case. Contrarianism is now the consensus. It’s gone mainstream. So it doesn’t matter that we were early adopters. Nor does it set us or our thinking apart anymore. Time, then, to shift to subversion in order to keep evolving and stay ahead of the pack.

While being contrarian means rejecting what is popular and going against the norm, subversion takes things a step further. It shines the spotlight on established or existing systems, and utilizes tools, skills and resources to overthrow, undermine, weaken or destroy them.

The last few years have opened our eyes to the fact that many of the pressing issues and injustices we face are consequences of flawed systems. Social shortcomings like racism and other inequities are byproducts of their design. Most people would see this as a failure. We, however, look at it a bit differently.

As strategists and designers, there are many systems we have the power and obligation to undermine in our daily work. In a recent piece, our design director Wednesday Krus discussed the vital role that UI/UX designers have in making the internet less dark by weakening common practices that let brands deceive consumers for profit and power. That is just one example of our studio’s actions centered around activism, awareness and engagement, the principles we constantly strive to build upon.

We are, of course, realists. Entities like social media and the healthcare, justice and food systems are simply operating the way they were designed to. Twitter was designed to be a place of connection and free conversation, regardless of who was connecting and over what subject matter. Health insurance, meanwhile, was designed to give people access to care; that is, if they have the means to pay for it. And so on.

Looking back, it’s clear these systems were bound to fail before they even launched. They were created, intentionally or not, to suppress and weaken the many for the benefit of the few. They were made to be strong and last long without considering that the world would always be changing around them.

The rub is, it takes design to destroy design. That’s where subversion comes into play. Creators have long tapped into subversive practices to play their part in upending unjust systems. For the Brighton Museum’s 2013 exhibition titled Subversive Design, the institution explored “how designers, makers and manufacturers react to the world around them, playing with form, function and materials to create objects that provoke and amuse.” It explained that “for over 200 years craft and design have been used to engage and challenge political and social issues in both obvious and more hidden ways.”

While one person can make a difference, real subversion takes a collective effort. In the New York Public Library’s description of its exhibit Subversion & The Art of Slavery Abolition, the organization wrote that it took a collective of abolitionist writers, poets, illustrators, photographers and more to generate the knowledge, awareness and emotion necessary for “the formation of one of the movement’s most subversive projects: The Underground Railroad.”

To inspire and establish subversive initiatives, what’s needed is a community of creative, forward-thinking people. Writers, to encourage and bring clarity. Visual artists, to paint realities and make people aware. Poets and musicians, to create combinations of words and rhythms that make sure people never forget. The list goes on and on; the possibilities endless.

The poet Philip Larkin once said, “I think we got much better poetry when it was all regarded as sinful or subversive, and you had to hide it under the cushion when somebody came in.” Consensus flattens an idea. Subversion sets it free. When you don’t look for a mold to fill or rules to follow, opportunities abound. True, it might take more work to get noticed, but working outside an established system is where the magic happens. That’s where we as a studio thrive; where real change is possible.

So now we ask: Who is ready to move forward? Who has the guts to shift, not just to join us in taking a stand but in tearing systems down?

I WANT TO BREAK FREE

Why It’s Time to Leave UX Laws Behind

The scientists working away in the 1960s had no idea their proto internet would live on long after the Cold War which gave birth to it. In those early days of the Web, the goal was to create an alternate way for government leaders to communicate with each other. But by the 1980s, once computer scientist Vinton Cerf had nailed down how to connect computers all over the world, when it came to innovation the sky was the limit.

Browsers and search engines were invented. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates built their empires. And Millennials came of technological age. For they’ve been the ones who’ve turned the Internet’s limitless landscape into a tool for gathering information, building community, entertainment and, most importantly, commerce. Trouble is, as user experience patterns were refined, passed from brand to brand, from person to person, the Internet’s become too designy and overly scientific. These days, templates and modular tools rule; curiosity and creativity have fallen by the wayside. Wix, Squarespace, Shopify and the like dominate the landscape with their modular, atomic design and UX principles. Designs are built block by block, page by page — hero, call to action, product feature, emotional hook and the like. It’s same old same old, over and over. Snore.

The one-size-fits-all model is a great starting point for a new entrepreneur with limited design or development resources. But for designers, these platforms opened the door for a generation reliant on automation. The formula isn’t flawed — but the dependency on it is.

The more’s the pity, too, because by nature the Internet can be a weird, wonderful place. That is, if we let it be. And that’s what Gen-Zers see, breaking free from the reigns of UX on platforms like TikTok. If only we could close the book on UX Laws and get back to the spirit of exploration and experimentation that shaped the Web early on, then the possibilities would be endless.

The plain fact is, nothing changes if nothing ever changes. Innovation? If trailblazers only walked down well-worn paths, forget it. When it comes to the digital landscape, nobody’s going to learn a new digital experience if all you keep giving them is one that prioritizes usability over creative thinking. Of course, websites and applications must be easy and intuitive to navigate. Data, logic and psychology are key to shaping the user journey. Whether it’s choosing a new pair of glasses or sending someone flowers, users arrive at a site with a goal in mind, and the easier it is for them to complete that goal, the more usable the site is considered.

In order to achieve that, though, designers stay laser focused on meeting the strict criteria dictated by UX Laws. Take, for instance, Brad Frost and his Atomic Design System. No question it’s a great resource for design systems thinking. Still, is his restrictive UX approach right for everyone? Can it, in fact, be used as a launching pad for new directions? Testing, iterating, and inclusive design processes may be essential, but if we want to really benefit users we must think of them as people, not lab mice. Our lives are more than set a goal — meet a goal — get reward — repeat.

Moreover, while we’re being led into that sea of repetitious sameness, who’s benefitting? Certainly not users, who are being psychologically tricked into completing a brand’s goal. Consider that the innovative UX Laws adhered to by millennials are precisely what paved the way for Dark Patterns — essentially UX and UI tricks that designers and brands intentionally play to convince users to complete an action they wouldn’t have otherwise completed. We’re talking about forced subscriptions, intentionally misguiding language, “free” trials, and hidden costs that require extra effort for the user to avoid.

But then there are the brands that think outside of the templated box. They look to creativity as how to build provocative experiences that inspire us to engage in a shared goal. At ThoughtMatter, we believe brands create lasting connections with their audience when the relationship is built on trust and honesty. People enter relationships with brands that feel authentic, not brands looking to trick them at every turn.

If I went to a store and bought a bottle of sunscreen, only to find out that I then would be charged for a new bottle of sunscreen every month, I’d be pretty unhappy. And I’d be even unhappier if I had to jump through all sorts of hoops to stop being charged. Behind those annoying charges? Dark patterns. Because they’ve proven so powerful at driving short-term revenue, it’s why many templates and stores utilize them. Here’s the rub, though. Anytime consumers have to work harder to cancel that recurring charge than to purchase something, sooner or later the sheer aggravation of it all could wind up turning them off.

Here’s where UI/UX designers can play a vital role so things don’t even get that far. I believe it’s their responsibility to make the Internet less dark. Take the power away from the brands and give it back to the consumers in ways that delight them and are trap-free. Step away from the sticky notes. Ditch the laws of UX. Instead, start from scratch. Create symbiotic experiences that are mutually beneficial to brands and the people who support them; experiences that are compelling and desirable for extended visits. Take a page from TikTok and break free from the UX ideologies that millennials have clung to so hard.

TikTok is the digital equivalent of wandering through an overgrown forest. There, algorithms lead users through the content. Compare that to the millennial-built digital world of meticulously placed navigation tools we have now — a well-paved path through a manicured garden, complete with signage, a map at every corner, and a brightly lit gift shop. I’m not asking designers to use algorithms as their guiding force, but perhaps there’s a way to apply this sort of thinking to branded experiences. When it comes to new designs, build upon the idea of user freedom that TikTok has been so successful with.

ThoughtMatter has embraced a sense of wonder and a freedom of exploration on projects like the GirlForward annual report, For the People, and the Photography 2020 Compendium. As a studio we are questioning it all and leaving the confines of UX Laws behind. We’re making room to feel comfortable in uncertainty; rewarding exploration when it comes to aligning our digital and brand thinking.

The Internet wouldn’t exist if those scientists in the Sixties had stayed within their comfort zone. So as we approach the halfway mark of 2021, how are you going to be part of web design’s next chapter? Are you going to stick to the same old modules and templates, or are you going to break free and leave the laws of UX behind?

COPE VS. CREATE

As more of us feel the blues while being cooped up, the idea isn’t just to cope but to create.

Change of season got you down? You’ve got plenty of company. While SAD (seasonal affective disorder) is known to affect only 5% of US adults every year, the symptoms — pervasive sadness, undue fatigue, difficulty concentrating, lost interest in normally enjoyed activities — may well be plaguing many millions more as a result of life under quarantine. And if doomscrolling panic, Zoom fatigue, SAD szn, remote work burnout and pent-up post-election hysteria aren’t already enough, with a second wave of coronavirus starting to hit and more stay-at-home orders sweeping the nation seasonal depression could soon get a whole lot worse.

What to do? Now that usual remedies like more in-person interaction and big social gatherings aren’t readily available, we need to find more creative ways to cope. Metapod, for one, to the rescue. It’s that big, green, Pokémon-inspired suit which doubles as a cocoon for humans and sold out less than seven hours after launching this month.

Unzip the Metapod, climb inside, and watch Sarah Cooper’s new Netflix comedy special Everything Is Fine, which feels like a tribute to the “this is fine” dog meme that first went viral in 2016 as our collective denial of a rapidly deteriorating situation. Everything, in fact, was certainly not fine back then, and still isn’t. An NPR review called the show “the first piece of pandemic entertainment to successfully convey the feelings of instability and emotional unsteadiness that have been part of so many of our lives since the spring.”

The “how it started vs. how it’s going” meme that people usually share to show glow-ups and big career moves has been overtaken by a more satirical view of the state of the world in 2020. How it started: blissful ignorance. How it’s going: dumpster fires everywhere.

how it started how its going pic.twitter.com/N2bxTLyKOx

— Mayor Guy Fieri (@GuyFieri) October 12, 2020

When lockdown is officially Collins Dictionary’s word of the year and we can buy life-sized cocoons online, there’s no denying our months-long quarantine has forced us to turn inwards. The Pandemic Logs series from the New York Times features seemingly mundane but telling details from readers’ diary entries about living in self-isolation. “My ‘remembering Dad’ sunflower bloomed today,” wrote Ann Bovee of Redmond, WA. “I went on a three-mile walk alone with my podcasts and wished I had a walking buddy,” wrote Pam R. of Sarasota, FL.

And while fast food brands on Twitter may be the cheeriest corner on the Internet, even McDonald’s, purveyor of Happy Meals, is questioning our mental well-being.

it’s always “when is the McRib coming back” and never “how are you doing person who runs the McDonald’s account”

— McDonald's (@McDonalds) October 23, 2020

This new kind of vulnerability in brand communications is refreshing. We want to get in touch with our anger, sadness and regret — emotions we experience but rarely discuss in public. America’s Secret Playlists, a research study that analyzed thousands of private Spotify playlists, called it a shift towards “emotional realism,” where 44% of Americans confess they have listened to music to purposely feel dark emotions.

So how do we find emotional release? Snack giant Mondelez International wants to help by “humaning”. That’s what the company calls its new global marketing strategy. The goal: Move away from pure data-driven tactics towards making more “human” connections with consumers. Not surprisingly, humaning has already racked up Pepsi levels of ridicule in the ad world for tone-deafness.

Who’s kidding whom? When it comes to releasing and providing relief from strong or repressed feelings, corporate America’s emotional range has so far been limited at best. Artists, on the other hand, know a thing or two about catharsis. “Make art. Talk to your family. Read. Watch a movie. Move a muscle — it changes a lot,” says Marilyn Minter in Hirshhorn Museum’s video diaries that take us inside artists’ studios as part of a living record of the worldwide pandemic.

People need the cathartic power of creativity now more than ever. As more of us feel the blues while being cooped up, the idea isn’t just to cope but to create. It’s why bedroom pop, with its homespun quality and lo-fi sounds, is one of the most popular genres today. Since 2018 it’s grown from an obscure Spotify playlist to one with more than 600,000 subscribers. Artists skew young and female, produce dreamy, contemplative music from their bedrooms and write about deeply personal issues. Your sad-music starter pack must include: mxmtoon, Clairo, FKA Twigs, Beabadoobee, Faye Webster.

In the gaming world, Animal Crossing’s popularity is similarly revealing. Says Bitch Media’s social media editor Marina Watanabe, everything about the social simulation game “from the cute aesthetic to the wholesome music to the mundane tasks and lack of combat or high stakes feels like it’s designed to keep me calm.”

Whether through DIY indie music or soothing virtual islands, more people are channeling their innermost thoughts and feelings in isolation by activating the imagination. The challenge for businesses, then, is to incubate creativity and fuel catharsis by providing an outlet for what can’t be shown or said. It makes us feel less alone.

When it comes to mental health, today’s marketing has been serving up the Four Seasons version when we clearly need more Total Landscaping — work and words that cut deeper, hit us right in the feels and snap us out of the numbness. As quarantine thickens my own cocoon of isolation and targeted ads about therapy from BetterHelp start to flood my social media feeds, the healing power of making is just what the doctor ordered.

A TALE OF TURNAROUND CITIES

Why small towns and cities need to develop “sticky capital”

After all that’s been said and done, the results of Amazon’s HQ2 Hunger Games Edition aren’t surprising. Were they going to settle for anything less than the metropolitan areas of New York City and a Washington DC suburb as locations of their co-headquarters? Both places are already concentrated top tech hubs and are prima donnas of innovation. After all of hoopla about competition, HQ2 wound up going where many observers of urban economics predicted: where huge pools of talent are already clustered. Setting up shop in these cities is easy and convenient; it’s like Prime Now delivery for business development.

Was it worth it: engaging 238 American cities, counties and states across the United States in a brutal bidding war in exchange for boosting their economic growth? The Silicon Valley savior complex was strong with this one. Quite a few cities on the HQ2 shortlist sit far from any coast: Indianapolis, IN; Pittsburgh, PA; Columbus, OH; Raleigh, NC. Cities large and small were falling over themselves to present Amazon with the sweetest deal, offering tax breaks, cash incentives and infrastructure improvements worth millions.

The fact that the competition ever appeared fierce, though, is a sign of how far American cities have come over the past generation. It’s hard to imagine many of the top contenders being taken seriously 25 years ago, when cities were still struggling to find their footing after years of economic decline. But when an obscenely wealthy tech company decides to invest further in the most economically vital places on earth, it only exacerbates the divide between America’s most successful metros and the rest of the country. It’s clear that economic development organizations in communities outside of these “superstar cities” need a new strategy to stay relevant.

Some cities have already realized this, and were confident enough in their futures to politely tell Amazon “thanks, but no thanks.” Consider Little Rock, Arkansas’ reaction to the Amazon bid. In a full-page ad it bought in a Jeff Bezos-owned publication, the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce coolly and cleverly explained why Amazon’s HQ2 is just not right for Little Rock. The playful ad styled as a break-up letter pointed out that Little Rock missed many of the requirements in Amazon’s RFP — and how that’s Amazon’s unfortunate loss. The stunt quickly went viral and got Little Rock more eyeballs and attention than almost any other city in the running. The campaign doesn’t just raise awareness for a small city like Little Rock; it also elevates its potential and makes its residents proud.

San Antonio also dropped out of the running early in the race. The mayor and a county judge wrote a letter to Jeff Bezos informing him that they no longer wanted San Antonio to be considered for HQ2. “It’s hard to imagine that a forward-thinking company like Amazon hasn’t already selected its preferred location…” they wrote. “Sure, we have a competitive toolkit of incentives, but blindly giving away the farm isn’t our style.”

While everyone’s busily asking what these regions can do to attract the type of human capital and investment that Big Tech is doling out, they might be better off looking inwards and developing locally. Municipalities can offer up all the lucrative incentives in the world to bring in new talent and money, but can they really claim victory if the results don’t serve the people who were already there to begin with? In order to grow their economies, cities and towns need “sticky capital,” the type of investments that don’t just build companies and organizations but help root them in place.

Coming off of Amazon’s search, city and state governments are hyper-aware of their current assets and challenges to attracting talent. They’ve taken stock of how people live, work, play in and explore their areas. How can they use this research not to lure Silicon Valley juggernauts, but to help grow local businesses interested in staying put?

Nashville won the HQ2 consolation prize, of sorts — an operations center that will receive about $230 million in investments and hire 5,000 full-time workers — largely because it was already doing a great job of making smart investments in its anchor institutions and local entrepreneurs. The city’s long-standing healthcare industry complements a booming music scene and an entrepreneurial program by Launch Tennessee that offers mentorship and incubator spaces. Pair that with the historic Ryman Auditorium, the Music City Center and the annual 36|86 Entrepreneurship Festival, and it’s obvious that the bona fide hockey town has found thoughtful and economically sustainable ways of leveraging its anchor institutions.

Opportunities for developing sticky capital go well beyond the hospitals, universities, and colleges, the traditional anchor institutions that make up the so-called “eds and meds” sector. Today, places ranging from museums and libraries to public parks and places of worship are becoming economic innovators. These are places that are rooted in a specific community: you can’t just take a church or mosque and move it across the country for tax incentives, because the congregation can’t come with you. This means that they have every incentive to help the surrounding community to thrive. They know their communities and can work with cities to identify and foster opportunity.

At ThoughtMatter we spend a great deal of time thinking about the concept of place. We’ve worked on brand identity, messaging and marketing for a wide variety of place-focused organizations, from nonprofits like Tacoma Arts Live and the New-York Historical Society to economic development agencies the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce and the Lower East Side Partnership. We’ve written about how craft breweries, micro-libraries and even laundromats can become cultivators of community at a divisive cultural moment.

As Queens-based congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted shortly after the HQ2 announcement, “Displacement is not community development.” Economic development is often something we imagine coming from outside, but there is existing talent and creativity in any community. It may not be tech talent, but a strong economy is a diverse economy, and trying to become the next Silicon Valley is, for most cities, a losing game. The original Silicon Valley is still the indisputable center of tech, even as its titans expand their presence in political and media centers like DC and New York.

Pursuing investment from firms located elsewhere isn’t an intrinsically bad idea for cities, but so long as it remains the dominant economic development strategy it will always prove an uphill battle. As the magnetism of “superstar cities” shows no sign of weakening, local development needs to play a larger role in small- and mid-sized American cities. In a culture where everyone wants to be the Uber of something, we recommend being proudly, unapologetically you.

ERASING THE STIGMA

Brands and organizations can make it more acceptable to talk about mental health

It’s safe to say that you to have at least one friend, family member, or coworker suffering from a mental illness. It’s also safe to say you might not know who those people are or what they’re suffering from. The plain fact is, nearly one out of five Americans suffer from some form of a mental illness every year.

Why are we in the dark about something so widespread? There has long been a stigma about mental health at both the national and global level; many cultures consider even talking about it as taboo. But this stigma doesn’t just lead people to live lives full of suffering and shame in silence. It can have deadly consequences. More people in the U.S. die from suicide than from car accidents, and about 90% of them suffer from a mental illness. Yet despite such morbid stats, the conversation, advocacy and strategies to help combat mental health issues remain woefully lacking.

Nevertheless, hope resides. Thanks to a number of factors, both positive and negative, mental health has gradually worked its way into the greater national conversation, and the U.S. now seems to be at a turning point on its relevance.

First, the negative. The never-ending gun violence, acts of terror, and culture of assault plaguing our country have made mental health a hot button issue. Some see it as the primary reason why these acts are being committed. Many, on the other hand, don’t buy that premise and label it a straw man. Where we stand politically or socially often determines which side of the debate we’re on.

As for the positive, mental health is attracting greater attention because individuals and brands of influence are leading efforts to break down the stigma that long hushed people up. Some of the world’s star athletes, artists and personalities are speaking out on their own struggles and triumphs with mental health and are advocating for those suffering.

Trouble is, the way they’re doing it oftentimes comes off as superficial or fleeting. To create impactful, lasting change, long-term thinking and strategy is needed. It may be great for influential people and brands to talk about mental health, but for more people to feel comfortable about following suit, more needs to be done. We at ThoughtMatter feel these next steps are not out of reach and that opportunities abound for brands across the board to become catalysts for change.

Here are a few of the sectors that we think could lead the way:

Sports/Fitness

The universality of sport and fitness gives its leading lights a big leg up when considering the scope of reach they have. Our full props go to the current generation of athletes using their influence to build community and support causes like never before. There may be some who wish athletes would just “shut up and dribble”, but it is precisely these athletes who are showing the world they are superior citizens, too.

NBA star Demarr Derozan of the Toronto Raptors, recently opened up in the Toronto Star about his struggles with depression. That, in turn, inspired the Cleveland Cavaliers’ Kevin Love to use the Derek Jeter-founded platform The Players’ Tribune to write about his own bouts with mental illness and his changing perceptions on the topic.

“Growing up, you figure out really quickly how a boy is supposed to act. You learn what it takes to be ‘a man.’ It’s like a playbook: Be strong. Don’t talk about your feelings. Get through it on your own. So for 29 years of my life, I followed that playbook. And look, I’m probably not telling you anything new here. These values about men and toughness are so ordinary that they’re everywhere…and invisible at the same time, surrounding us like air or water. They’re a lot like depression or anxiety in that way.” — Kevin Love

While all major U.S. sports leagues have some sort of mental health program, the NBA has been the leader and is about to name its first-ever Director of Mental Health and Wellness. I like to think this was sparked in great part by Ron Artest, who in a post-game interview with ESPN following his impressive performance in the series-clinching game of the 2010 NBA Finals, thanked his psychiatrist less than ten seconds into the interview.

Another league that often comes to mind when thinking about mental health, especially in recent years, is the NFL. It is, by now, pretty much common knowledge that injuries sustained in football, specifically to the head, have led to many mental health issues in players both pre- and post-retirement. To that end, the NFL has established internal departments to bring mental health resources to its players, teams, and league staff, as well as to advocate for mental health awareness. Even so, many consider the league’s response to be too little too late, especially as stories of dead or retired players suffering from brain damage keep making the headlines.

It’s hard to ignore the fact that people are now more aware than ever about the serious damage the sport can wreak, not only on pro players but on players competing at any level. The NFL’s image as a league lacking in transparency has also driven its negative perception. With the league facing a tough task ahead to regain its former clout, a big first step is working to fix its fractured relationship with its players. After all, who better to be spokesmen putting forward the message that the league is changing? To accomplish this, the NFL and its players must develop a more thorough –and transparent–strategy on how to address the mental health issues haunting the game.

We’ve also seen brands in the sports and fitness sector partner with athletes in an effort to advocate for mental health awareness. In 2015, Under Armour linked up with NFL wide receiver Brandon Marshall, who has been outspoken about his own mental health, and his nonprofit Project375. Together they developed a line of apparel with messaging around mental health awareness and dedicated 100% of the profits to reduce the stigma around mental health, sending the money to advocacy groups and schools. But Under Armour’s initiative, while admirable, was short-lived, without a long-term follow-up plan in place.

Not often heard from, are Nike and Adidas, both of which have strengths that would serve tremendously in the effort to erase the mental health stigma. What Nike probably does better than any brand is to convey the emotion of sport, and how that emotion drives not only professional athletes but everyone who is active in one way or another. Nike could utilize this powerful marketing tool to build empathy around mental health worldwide. As for Adidas, in recent years it has tapped into cultural relevancy both inside and outside the world of sports by building a roster of influential athletes, artists, tastemakers and the like–all at the heart of contemporary life. In a world where influence can be bought, Adidas has the opportunity to use the reach it now has through brand ambassadors to build awareness and conversation around mental health while pushing its athletic wear and sneakers.

Many studies have shown the connection between physical and mental health; how exercise can reduce anxiety and depression while improving self-esteem and cognitive function. But some forms of mental illness can make it hard to get out of bed, let alone run for miles. With that in mind, there truly is a need for fitness brands to step up and do more. Look no further than the old-school YMCA for a grass roots approach on how to promote this synergy. A global organization rooted in physical fitness, among the programs it offers to support the needs of the communities it serves are free mental health counseling services for both adolescents and adults. For teens suffering from depression and anxiety, sessions are split equally between mental health education and exercise programming.

Social Media

There’s no denying that social media platforms have become an integral part of our lives, fundamental to our personal development and our career successes. Nevertheless, studies show there is a connection between social media use and depression, anxiety, sleep problems, eating issues, and the increased incidence of suicide, especially among youth. Most social media platforms were built on the premise of building stronger relationships among people and making the world a smaller place, yet the results have been quite the contrary. It turns out that, the more time people spend on these platforms, the more socially isolated they see themselves as being.

When you drink a beer, buy a pack of cigarettes, or go to the movies, you’re warned about the implications of what you are about to indulge in. So why is something harmful to your mental health held to a lesser standard or level of concern? These platforms thrive on and profit from their ability to collect, analyze and leverage data for the purpose of sales of products, events, and programs. Why can’t they try to figure out how to utilize this information and their skillsets to make a positive impact on the mental health of their users?

Facebook, the leading player, should set an example for other social platforms by taking an affirmative stand on mental health. The company could develop guidelines and strategies to help combat the sense of isolation felt by many using its platform. In that regard, look no further than the initiative taken by Facebook’s own subsidiary Instagram. In 2017, after recognizing how many people not only use their platform to share stories, encouragement, and information about mental health, but to search for mental health support, Instagram launched the #HereForYou campaign. The video campaign featured Instagram users discussing their own struggles with mental health disorders and challenges, utilizing the #HereForYou hashtag and a number of others already commonly used on the platform.

“Every day on Instagram, we see people share their mental health journeys and connect with communities of support. From dedicated accounts around an issue to unique hashtags adopted by groups, these communities are helping to make illnesses that are often invisible to friends and family visible through photos and videos.” — Kevin Systrom, Instagram co-founder and CEO

Travel/Hospitality

The benefits of travel to mental health would seem obvious. It’s no surprise that there is evidence traveling can relieve stress brought on by work and daily life. Moreover, the exploration of new places and experiences makes us more mentally resilient by taking us outside our comfort zone. A Cornell University study even showed that “the anticipation of a trip can increase your happiness substantially, even more than the anticipation of acquiring something tangible, like a new car.”

It’s a no-brainer, then, that brands in the travel and hospitality industries, as well as cities and municipalities, could offer further support to the mental health of their customers and communities. Case in point: The London Underground recently launched a series of new maps, one of which includes a map specifically designed for those suffering from anxiety, providing train routes that required the least amount of ride time underground.

Other cities ought to take a page from London’s playbook and think about how they can provide wayfinding for their residents and visitors that best suits their mental health. Take New York City, whose public transportation is the bane of many of its patrons’ existence. If the city paid serious attention to their riders’ mental health while considering how to bring its municipal transit system into the future, that would go hand-in-hand with other much-needed upgrades now in the works.

Then there are the giant hotel groups like Hilton, Hyatt and Marriott, and boutique hotels and mini-chains. They could offer meditation spaces or hotline services so their guests might connect to mental health resources if needed. Ditto to airlines, often associated with the most stressful part of traveling. Although costs are a huge issue for this struggling industry, even providing beneficial reading or listening materials in-flight could help tremendously in easing mental health-related concerns of their passengers.

Automotive

The auto industry may not seem an obvious candidate to be at the forefront of mental health advocacy, but it has several characteristics that make it a worthy contender. First of all, many people in rural or suburban areas of the country spend much of their lives on the road for both work and social purposes. If you have mental health issues, all that time in a confined space without physical activity can negatively impact your health. Car companies should do their homework on how best to address the needs of such customers.

Then there’s road rage. This phenomenon, the result of the stresses from driving, is another area ripe for these companies to explore. The goal: Help initiate changes that will prevent people from reaching dangerously explosive levels of anger.

One brand in the pole position to lead this charge is Tesla. As a pioneer in electric automobiles, it puts a spotlight on innovation. Already a change agent for how we think about energy and technology, who better than Tesla founder Elon Musk to promote creative new solutions for tackling the mental health stigma head on? Nor should we forget traditional auto manufacturers like General Motors and Ford. Locked in a battle with Tesla and others to produce the quality vehicles of the future, it would be forward-thinking of them to get engaged in the conversation around mental health in order to present themselves to car buyers in a positive and progressive light.

Conclusion

The issues concerning mental health aren’t going to be resolved by the medical community alone. These are concerns that, one way or another, impact us all. The time is now for those with the most influence to play their part. Brands don’t have to make much of an effort to lend their hand. It’s about their speaking out, advocating, communicating through the multiple means at their disposal. Brands that truly want to change lives will appreciate that it will take deep thinking, strategic planning and partnerships, and a concerted effort to erase this stigma for good.