For the last few years marketers have attempted to challenge traditional marketing - 'digital disruption' they called it. Ugh how I hate that lazy term.
While we've all been busy disrupting marketing, a 'socially acceptable' digitally-savvy mob morphed, which share and rally the same opinions, likes and dislikes.
In other words, our perception of what is true to us is formed by what we like or agree with as a collective group. This makes us feel safe and part of an agreeable pack.
In a world of Trump and Brexit, people scratched their heads and wondered who voted for this. Yet masses of less than 'acceptable' opinions gathered, voted and won. Their opinions weren't new. They weren't ground-breaking. Some views were bleak, but ultimately telling.
The digital alienation that's been created has been enabled by people like you and I. We share and like posts and images that reflect our own interests, aspirations and perceptions of ourselves. We censor our opinions if they don't fit in with the favoured consensus on social media or even at dinner party chatter.
It's a sad, sad time when it's so scary to be disagreeable.
And what does this mean for brands in 2017 when brand values continue to be so critical? Will brands and leaders indeed disrupt views that are 'safe' and risk being disagreeable or indeed, just true to them?
Robust conversations and political debate have been hushed for so long that indeed a disruption of opinion needs to occur, although, it seems it already has.