I can’t say too much just yet. But let’s just say if you’ve got a competitive streak, this is going to be for you. (If you don’t like money, nothing to see here.) We’ll share more over the next few days, so watch this space 👀

- Charlotte Ellis, Editor ♡

And it’s clear you haven’t just lost them. You’ve lost the deal.

Well, that doesn't have to be you anymore. Because in this 90-minute session taught by Nathan James, Executive Creative Director at The Attention Seeker, you’ll learn the real art of selling subjective ideas (from someone who’s worked with some of the world’s biggest brands).

If you want to know how to:

✅ Keep the room hooked from your first sentence to the final slide
✅ Nail the 3-nod method that gets instant buy-in, every time
✅ Use their objections to strengthen your pitch

...this workshop is for you.

Forget “we’ll think about it.” You’ll leave this session knowing how to make every client say, “please take my money.”

Thursday, 4 Dec | 8:30 - 10am NZT | $49

"PSA for the girls: You don't have to be obese to start a GLP-1."

—Or, at least, that's what the subway ads are telling Americans now. The popularity of Ozempic, et al. has created a cultural shift, where body positivity is out and skinny is back in. And now, American telehealth companies are claiming microdosing GLP-1 drugs is the solution to those pesky 5 pounds the girlies have been trying to lose. Targeted ads on social media, billboards, and subway stations call out women who have a wedding coming up, or who just want to shed a little weight.

And the uptake is huge. A study done back in August found that 30% of people taking GLP-1 prescriptions were not overweight or diabetic. That's up from 3% in 2018. That's... concerning, considering these drugs were never intended for people who don't have a medical need to lose weight (and they’ve never been tested on people with a BMI under 27). Marketing these drugs for vanity use goes against FDA guidelines. The agency's cracking down on the ads, but sadly, it seems to be a case of whack-a-mole.

Cost of living crisis, who? This year, consumers shopped like there's no tomorrow (because, maybe there isn't?). But what used to be an occasion for waking up at 4am and standing outside an electronic store, waiting for it to open, now largely happens online. Last Friday, online spending in the US alone topped almost $12B, up 9.1% from last year. However, U.S. shoppers bought fewer items in total, suggesting consumers are actually buying less, just at a higher price point.

According to Salesforce, the most popular categories for Black Friday shoppers were electronics, along with clothes and cosmetics. Not surprisingly, more and more consumers are opting to buy now pay later. Let's just hope that new big tv is worth going into debt for...

Last Saturday, X's Head of Product, Nikita Bier, posted that platform users would now be able to see each others' location. Misinformation, fake users profiles, and bot accounts have become a growing problem on X. According to Bier, this feature is meant to increase transparency on the platform as a "global town square." And that it has. As soon as the feature rolled out, it became apparent that many accounts were... how you say... lying about who they are and where they're from. For example, turns out several MAGA-supporting accounts with large followings are based in countries like Bangladesh, India, and Thailand.

Immediately after the announcement, users began questioning 1) whether this was a good idea, and 2) how accurate the data would be. Several users expressed concern for the safety of people living in countries where free speech is limited. And many wondered whether using a VPN would skew location data. It seems X has solved this with a disclaimer stating that location data "may not be accurate" for some users. Former X employees say this is an idea the platform's been toying with since 2018. Now, time will tell whether it has the impact Bier hopes it will.

- Charlotte Ellis, Editor ♡

Not just employee, and not quite an influencer. An amalgamation of the two.

A creature who can file an expense report, lead a client meeting, and also film a chaotic “accidentally left my Teams mic on” skit that racks up 800k views before lunch.

The seductive new model where staff aren’t just labour—they’re narrative infrastructure. Micro-IP inside a larger brand portfolio. Humans as cultural distribution channels.

The old “work in exchange for wage” model feels Victorian in comparison. Now, you’re paid in salary, benefits, and the subtle pressure to go viral for the company LinkedIn. The wildest part is that it works. And it works a little too well.

They’re messy, charming, unpredictable, chaotic. Basically everything corporate comms will never allow itself to be. They make work look fun and culture feel alive. They unleash something corporations have been trying (and failing) to manufacture for years: desire.

When people see a workplace where everyone is laughing, pranking, fit-checking, roasting their boss, and making memes about the printer, it triggers something dangerous. It makes you want to be there. It makes you horny for work.

The employee-as-brand model doesn’t just show you what the company does. It shows you who you could be inside it. But behind the perfectly chaotic TikToks lies a much more complex system.

Turning employees into content assets comes with pipelines, guidelines, risks, and a level of identity gymnastics most HR departments are absolutely not equipped to handle. It’s not “cute, let’s make a video about everyone’s lunches.” It’s psychological architecture. It’s operational machinery. It’s a precarious dance with boundary collapse.

So before you go all-in on this kind of strategy, let’s break down the good, the bad, and the ugly.

In the best-case scenario, this model is genuinely empowering. Employees get visibility. Influence. Portfolio pieces. Proof they can create content, communicate clearly, and represent the brand. Crucial skills in a world where every job now involves some level of public-facing storytelling.

Done well, this creates:

It’s a win-win. The brand gets cultural capital. The employee gets social capital. Everyone thrives. But only if it’s built right.

Here’s where the rot creeps in. When you turn employees into brand assets, the participation becomes gamified. Who made the top-performing TikTok this month? Who’s the breakout “office personality”? Who’s the face of the brand this quarter?

Suddenly visibility becomes a currency. And, like any currency, it creates pressure.

Pressure to perform. Pressure to be “on.” Pressure to produce content that aligns with your persona, even on days you hate your job, or want to be left alone. God FORBID you have an ugly day and don’t feel like livestreaming your shenanigans to the world.

Companies love to say participation is “optional,” but we all know how workplace dynamics work. The people who play the game are rewarded. The people who don’t eventually look like they’re not part of the culture. That’s lowkey giving soft coercion.

This is the part no one wants to talk about. When your employer turns you into a character, you’re performing a self. Not just doing your job. You must create a curated, meme-able, brand-safe version of you.

And that impacts identity.

Where does the employee end and the content persona begin? What happens if your content goes viral for the wrong reasons? Who protects you from backlash? What if your online “work self” bleeds into your real personal brand? Who owns your likeness? Your ideas? The storylines you created?

Without clear boundaries, this model can tip into exploitation very quickly. People aren’t props. They’re not mascots. They’re not charisma vending machines.

If companies want to unleash libidinal energy, they need to be ready for the emotional responsibility that comes with it.

If brands want to build this model without ruining people’s lives, they need more than vibes. They need infrastructure. Here’s what that COULD look like:

It’s a reconfiguration of work itself. A shift from labour to performance. From worker to brand asset. From employment to narrative co-creation.

If companies want employees to be brands, they need to treat them like creatives, not characters. Otherwise it won’t be a workplace. It’ll be a content farm with a payroll.

-Sophie Randell, Writer

The audio comes from the lyric “If you knew me at all, you wouldn’t try to keep me small” from Olivia Dean’s song "Let Alone the One You Love", off her album The Art of Loving. It’s soft, dramatic, and the perfect soundtrack to share all the things that make you unique.

The trend is simple. Slide One says: “If you knew me…” And Slide Two says: “at all,” surrounded by text listing the things that define that person. So, think your favourite things, your go-to phrases, your aesthetics, the products you can’t live without, or anything that feels canonically you.

For example:

Make a two-slide carousel using photos of yourself:

A few ideas to get you started:

-Paris Foskin, Intern  

😲WTF Fish out of water?
❤How wholesome Puppy pile
😊Soooo satisfying How many leaves??
🍝What you should make for dinner tonight Delicious Italian food

Hey Fraser!

It doesn't really matter. Don't let these small details stop you from getting started. Just pick one approach and go for it. Whether you use your personal account or create a new one, the most important thing is actually creating and sharing content.

Your brand will build over time, and you can always adapt your handle or approach later. What truly matters is whether you're creating attention-grabbing content that connects with people and sells a human truth. So stop overthinking it and just start making videos. The name of the account isn't important - the content and how you connect with your audience is what really counts.

- Charlotte Ellis, Editor ♡