Will Brands Die? How Digital Disruption Is Redefining Brand Strategy

Will brands die? In "Three Phenomena of Brand Disappearance," the author answers yes, but not because brands cease to exist; rather, the traditional pathways for building brands are being overturned. After existing channels are disrupted, how should brands be formed and where should the focus lie? This article provides answers.

Before the internet became ubiquitous, many believed brands would become a thing of the past as the internet grew. Early observers like Carl Shapiro and Hal R. Varian, co‑authors of the influential 1999 book Information Rules , predicted that brand power would shrink as free information became abundant. This prediction proved wrong; today the internet is dominated by a few major brands.

The expansion of the internet also highlights the strong adaptability of weaker brands. Stanford professors Itamar Simonsen and Emmanuel Rosen, in their new book Absolute Value: What Really Influences Customers in the Information Age? , argue that marketers need to reassess the impact of brands on consumer purchase decisions, noting that when consumers can obtain product quality information through reviews, expert opinions, or social media, brand importance diminishes.

The decline of large brands follows a clear logic: a brand’s primary role is to make product choice easier for consumers. If consumers can easily access reviews and expert opinions, the brand’s value drops. The rise of mobile networks provides strong evidence for this theory.

However, this does not mean "brands are doomed." In fact, digital penetration has made brands more important and valuable. Current brand rankings show digital brands like Apple, Google, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, and Samsung dominate the top spots, not because consumers have abandoned traditional brands like Coca‑Cola or Mercedes, but because digital brands have surged ahead.

Brands remain crucial. Simonsen and Rosen err by applying old branding methods to the digital economy, conflating brand value, role, and meaning. Google and Apple succeed because they built their own brands: Google spends little on traditional ads, yet leverages free services and innovation to maintain relevance; Apple uses low‑budget marketing and the "Think Different" slogan to reshape its brand through superior design and unified product experience.

Branding is not merely about solving information problems. It must provide meaning and satisfy emotional needs—fundamental human desires that persist. While information overload may push consumers toward familiar or comfortable content, disruptive digital services will continue to evolve, and brands like Pinterest and WhatsApp illustrate the long road toward price‑controlled, brand‑driven services.

Therefore, marketers and managers should shift the discussion from "whether to have a brand" to "how to strengthen brand building when traditional tools like advertising, PR, and corporate identity systems wane."

One answer is to make the brand more central, not peripheral. In a highly transparent digital world, consumers can easily verify whether a company’s words match its actions. Companies can no longer separate marketing from product development, communication from service; they must integrate into the customer value chain.

Products and services must learn to tell stories, shedding the veneer of advertising and conveying genuine value. As information becomes ever more accessible and brand value rises, storytelling through action and product will be the sole path to brand success.