Case Notes
What I’m Seeing: the ways brands act, react, and reveal themselves.
Seen/Heard/Noted
The Harris Campaign Rebrand
The Vice President’s new memoir revisits the 107 days of her campaign — part behind-the-scenes account, part political post-mortem. It reads like an apologia: measured, careful, more managed than confessional.
I love any political behind-the-scenes story, but here you can feel the guardrails. Lots of regret and reflection with equal amounts repair, while floating the not-so-subtle possibility that she might run again.
M&M’s Mascot Resurrection
First, M&M’s retired the “spokescandies” after right-wing backlash over their new, allegedly “woke” redesigns (the green one wore sneakers instead of heels!). Then, after a temporary handoff to Maya Rudolph as “Chief of Fun,” the mascots quietly crept back for the brand’s anniversary campaign.
Taylor Swift’s NFL Era
The NFL thinks it’s borrowing her fandom; she’s actually rebranding the league in her image. What started as a celebrity sideshow has evolved into a full-blown marketing strategy — camera cuts, merchandise tie-ins, and the choreography of visibility.
It’s easy to dismiss it as hype, but she’s doing what every strong brand does: reframing the stage to make herself the story. The NFL gets a cultural sugar high; she hands us a masterclass in audience expansion. Guess who comes out ahead.
The New York Times and the Business of Trust
The Times has launched another campaign built around “independent journalism” and the question “Who do you believe?” — a direct nod to a culture where truth itself feels negotiable. The ads are polished and the message earnest, but the subtext is harder to miss: trust has become a marketing problem.
The paper’s authority once derived from its being accepted without explanation. Now it has to explain. When credibility becomes a campaign, you know the ground has shifted.
The Takeaway
Each one of these stories is about control — who owns the story, who shapes it, who gets to say what it means.
Whether it’s a politician trying to shape the public narrative, a megastar reframing a billion-dollar industry, or a legacy brand defending its own relevance, the question is the same: how much truth can a brand afford?
The M&M’s saga might seem trivial next to politics or the press, but it’s the same machinery at work — reacting instead of leading, confusing noise for feedback, and ending up with a brand trying to get out of its own way..
I spend my days helping people define what’s real in their own work. Watching these public gymnastics, I’m reminded that the only thing riskier than telling your story is letting someone else tell it for you.
(P.S. You can always find more tools and ideas at thebranddame.com.)
💬 How to Write the One Sentence That Will Change How You Talk About Your Work — Forever
If you’re like many people, you know what you do — but explaining it is another story. Most people, even people at the top of their game, struggle to talk about their work in a way that’s clear, compelling, and memorable.
They ramble. They undersell themselves. Or they sound just like everyone else.
My downloadable, 45-minute micro-course — Brand in a Bottle: How to Write the One Sentence That Will Change How You Talk About Your Work Forever — is a one-of-a-kind, step-by-step tutorial for crafting the single, strategic sentence that instantly becomes the backbone of your brand and messaging.
It will change how you talk about what you do — in under an hour.
Brand Therapy™ with Lyn Chamberlin is the biweekly publication of The Brand Dame, a nimble consultancy offering brilliant branding advice, on demand.
Our work is based on a simple idea: you probably don’t need a whole expensive branding engagement. You just need expert branding advice in the moment — a chance to talk through ideas, get unstuck, and walk away with a plan.
Whether you’re a trailblazer or running an organization, this is for you.
It’s branding, reimagined.





The industries that are waffling to meet new expectations have something in common. NO fucking backbone. NONE. The waffling is sourced in fear. That's pretty sad. And the New York Times? They've been "the paper" my whole life. I was explaining to a friend the other day. The Sunday Times, every weekend. Grabbing for 1. The Book Review, 2. The Magazine Section, and 3. Arts and Leisure. I went down the path of memory to one of my favorite Sunday morning treats; the Al Hirschfeld weekly illustration of the latest celebrity, Broadway show, etc. They were always amazing, but the game was all about finding the Ninas hidden within the drawing. I didn't even bother looking at his clue (the number of them recorded next to his signature). I'd find as many as I could and THEN look at the number to see if I got them all. Nina, for your readers who are unaware of the cherished practice, was Al Hirschfeld's daughter. I LOVED that. Now, the Times doesn't know what to be, but it's different, cagey, lacking the courage they used to convey. I barely glance at the news. Now, I do a brief scan of the front page, scowl at the careful language they're using to describe the travesty of the day, and I roll my eyes, cursing them in my head and then I wander of to the Games section. I look for cultural interest stories, and chuck the rest. What they used to stand for? Gone. Thanks for allowing my rant. xo
I love the summary point - that this is all about control. It fits into the broader cultural context as well. Power is shifting, sources of authority and control are shifting. It's an important time to be living through, but will be glad when we come out on the other side. At least I hope I'll be glad.