"An unprecedented situation demands that society ask more questions"

m&k: Tyler Brûlé, let's first talk about the pandemic that changed all our lives. You have been - and I believe you have said this yourself in interviews - a "global nomad" for most of your life...

Tyler Brûlé: (laughs) I never said that - that always came from other people....

... in any case, you have always been a frequent traveler. If you don't mind us asking: Where have you spent the last few months?

At the beginning of March, when we already knew that something was coming, I had to go on another business trip to Japan - while more and more masks were seen on faces and the world was getting more nervous. I was in Tokyo for a few days and then made my way back to Switzerland via Stockholm. Since then I have been mostly in Zurich, interrupted by a few small trips to the mountains.

That must have been the longest period you've spent in one place since childhood. Did that bother you - or was it a welcome change? 

I found this to be a positive change. We had to take care of our businesses urgently anyway, so I needed a lot of time to talk, plan and think with my colleagues. Being in the same place for a while really helped me with that. And from my personal perspective... you know, I made the decision a few years ago to make Switzerland the center of my life and not just a part of it. Nevertheless, I've always been on the road a lot. During the pandemic, I woke up every morning in Zurich and realized how lucky I am to live here.

Many people have had to adopt a new work routine. They had to stay connected to the rest of the world from home via Zoom and Slack. How did you experience that?  

I didn't work from home, but was in the Seefeld office with my assistant right from the start. Apart from that, of course, many things were different. But I think I did quite well (laughs). It was a new routine, right, but I tried to get into it. And I can tell you something: I've managed not to attend a single Zoom call in the past five or six months. I've talked to so many people all over the world, but I haven't seen them during that time (laughs). My good old command center (points to a phone next to the couch in his office) has served its purpose just as well. I'm probably one of the few media people ever who actively avoided any form of zoom or hangout or whatever. But there were still communicative rituals: a daily conference call at 4 p.m., for example, to hear how the employees were doing.

After the most stringent measures were lifted - right on the Monday after - my three top executives also got on the plane to Zurich and have been there ever since. That was a very big part of what we did in the last two or three months: Bringing people from all over to Zurich and working on some normalization.

Within your company, there are different lines of business: Monocle magazine, of course, then your agency Winkreative, the Monocle stores and cafés, and the Trunk Clothiers stores with their own fashion collection. What has been the most difficult to manage in recent months? 

Spontaneously, I would say that the cafes and the stores gave us the most headaches... simply because they had to close for so long. Apart from the Monocle stores downtown and at the Hong Kong airport, everything was in a week-long lockdown, worldwide. On the other hand, when I think about it again, the magazine probably cost me the most work. It's our flagship and still what we do to make the money. We had to minimize the damage and make sure we survived as a company, even though quite a few advertisers canceled their campaigns.

Speaking of open stores in Hong Kong - with your international perspective, do you feel other countries have handled the situation better than Switzerland so far? 

I don't think I - or anyone else - can really assess that. At least at this point in time. Okay, Korea has probably done a good job, Hong Kong has probably done a good job, but the situation there is anything but stable.

I mean, look at how everybody was praising Singapore because of the low caseloads and because the economy kept going despite Corona. But suddenly there was a surge in cases among migrant workers and everything changed. Or the Swedes, who were the pariah among European nations because of their particular approach: Now they are back in the headlines because their caseload is declining while economic losses have remained low. Have they perhaps taken the right path? Who knows.

Do I hear a desire for more discussion about the measures that are being used to combat the pandemic?

I think there's some fatigue coming in about very strict measures - and in some areas people are seeing the absurdity of it all. If you open up the nightclubs again and ask people to leave contact information, but then you don't verify that information - what's the point of even doing that? So to answer your question, yes, an unprecedented situation like the one we are in requires society to ask more questions.

And frankly, we also need to talk about the point where these measures are lifted; where we want to accept that to some extent we live in a world of risk. Yes, things can go wrong. Yes, myself or people I know could get sick one day. But for me, there has to be a point where you take your foot off the brake and press back on the gas pedal. Look at the side effects of the protective measures: Have they been good for anyone's mental health? Or for the economy? Not at all.

The situation was particularly difficult for the airlines - which brings me to my next question: People in Switzerland still call you "Mr. Swiss" because you rebranded Swissair after its grounding. Now many planes of "your" airline are back on the ground; at least for the foreseeable future. Does that make you sad? 

Although I naturally feel very sorry for the employees, I would not say that I am "saddened" by the developments surrounding Swiss itself - or Lufthansa or any other airline. What moves me is rather that airlines symbolize something that will have to wait for now. They are a symbol of global trade and the direct cultivation of relationships. They symbolize the coming together of people from all over the world.

In the case of Swiss, however, it could be said that its aircraft are not only perceived as a means of transport - but that the Swiss also feel an emotional connection to the airline as such.

Oh, definitely ... and I think that's really a genuinely Swiss characteristic! There are very few countries that feel such a strong emotional attachment to their national airline - which I think also has to do with the size of Switzerland. A small country, yes, but one that at the same time has forged enormous international ties that the national airline has helped to build and maintain. You could say that the Swiss have preserved their spirit of independence while reaching out to the world.

Apart from what you said above about the "absurdity" of some measures: Would you say that Switzerland handled the pandemic well? 

The Federal Council worked very well, very efficiently, especially in the first weeks of the pandemic. As I said, we were very lucky to have moved our Monocle headquarters here. When we had to bring colleagues to Switzerland for meetings, we could just write to the authorities and say, "We have a board meeting," or "We have some people who need to come for this and that," and then that was taken care of. That made it much easier to get back to work.

In a recent newspaper article, you also spoke positively about rapid emergency assistance for companies. A friend of yours has had direct experience with this, hasn't he? 

Yes, I have worked in the Sunday Times wrote an opinion piece about it. A former editor of mine, who now has his own business, inquired about an interest-free loan during the bumpy weeks at the beginning of the pandemic. He said, "We don't know where this is all going, and we may need the money." After contacting his bank, the whole thing was approved within hours. Now his company is doing well again, but such experiences naturally strengthen confidence in Swiss bureaucracy.

Before you moved your headquarters to Zurich, the Monocle brand and its subsidiaries were based in London. Was your move purely for business reasons or did emotional reasons also play a role?  

It was both. I think there are some interesting things happening economically in Switzerland right now. And I think there has certainly always been a sense of stability here; increasingly since, but also before the pandemic. We haven't had to experience economic crises or a flare-up of terrorist attacks in Switzerland - we had to deal with the latter back in London. There were also a number of political processes in the UK that accelerated my decision; the Brexit for sure, the social climate in the country, and just this general lack of investment that you could feel everywhere. The austerity policies of recent years have taken an ever-increasing toll.

Don't you sometimes miss the creativity that London is known for? 

When I came to Europe from Canada in the 1990s, London was the city that interested everyone. It was the place to be. And London was more "European" than it is today, in the shadow of Brexit. Of course, it was insanely exciting to start something there. But is London still the creative magnet it once was? I think so, the metropolis has lost its appeal because it has become too expensive. At the moment it's getting a bit cheaper again to reside there, but still - creativity is conditioned by quality of life, I think. When you graduate from university as a graphic designer and decide to start your career in an agency in London, or work for a magazine or media company, it's just not the place it was ten or twenty years ago. This glitzy jewel with seemingly all the possibilities, where brands and movers and shakers flock ... some of that is left, but if you have to take a small apartment outside and commute two hours into the center every day - do you even want to do that anymore?

After taking a look at the past, let's focus on the future. Do you think the current situation will have a lasting impact on how we live, how we do business ... or do you think we will eventually return to where we were? 

I don't want to commit myself there (laughs).

You don't have to. 

I am not an oracle. I can only say: With Monocle, we have taken a pragmatic perspective since the beginning of the pandemic. We didn't want to be in the camp of people who say, "Oh, the world has changed forever, the future belongs to Zoom meetings alone, soon there will be no more airplanes and everyone will retire to the home office..." Much of what commentators in the media have speculated is, unfortunately, not a reflection of reality - but a bunch of nonsense to get air time. Many confuse a temporary change in habits brought about by external factors with a profound and lasting evolution. The way we live, travel and interact with each other has evolved over centuries, or at least decades. The self-proclaimed thought leaders who now believe we are going to abandon all of this forever are, in my opinion, mistaken. Just a few days ago I had to go abroad again on business. I heard the echoes of those who predicted in March that you would never see a full plane again. And guess what: people were wearing masks, but they were practically sitting on top of each other, that's how full it was.

But some things will be different "afterwards" - whenever that may be. For example, there will be quite a few companies that will have to file for bankruptcy...

There will indeed be victims of this crisis. But many business models that are currently no longer working were probably not a good idea in the first place. They would have disappeared from the market in five years anyway; the virus only served as a catalyst. Look, for example, at the margins that low-cost airlines have operated on. Sure, it worked as long as these airlines could expand like crazy. But the situation was still always volatile. What I'm saying is, are we going to abandon the concept of low-cost air travel altogether? I don't think so. But will we see Whizz and EasyJet and Ryanair still in the market eighteen months from now? I'm not convinced of that. There will be consolidation.

And travel for business purposes? Is that just going to decrease internationally? 

It may be nice to book the Bürgenstock Resort for a conference. That's also where you look good as a CEO when you say, "Let's stay here, do something locally." But when the time comes and there is another good offer to send the whole team to Phuket, the planes to Thailand will be full (laughs). I'm sure of that.

Still - at least for a while, many people will have to adjust to new circumstances. With your background as a multi-entrepreneur, what recommendations would you give to a person starting something new? 

An important part of the creative process when you want to do something new - whatever it is - has always been to question the status quo. To question why the current solution is considered the best and what could perhaps be done better. That's our job as journalists, but it's also critical in any other profession. Before we start Monocle began, I roamed the magazine sections in the stores and looked at the publications you could buy there. And I asked myself: Why are these titles like this? Why are they designed this way or that way? For example, I used to spend a lot of time at WH Smith trying to figure out who was buying which newspaper. One day I saw a guy GQ from the shelf, but then also took the Economist bought. And I thought, "Could I combine these two magazines?" It all starts with constant questions, which then hopefully reveal a gap in the market or a flaw in a competitor's product. You can go from there.

Building a company - starting a project - always means building a brand. You're not only a publisher, but also a branding expert: What do you think makes a strong brand? 

I think my idea of what that is has changed a little bit. If we lived in a world where the media worked more slowly and brands were more static, then I would say that clarity of message and high recognition value are essential. But we don't live in a world like that - and that's why I'm convinced that brands today need a certain mystique above all else.

Could you elaborate on that? 

When a brand focuses only on clarity and recognition, I know its logo when I see it. Boom! (claps hands). Yeah, there goes the mystique (laughs). I can place the colors and graphic patterns of the logo right away without really thinking about it. And I might even memorize what the company does, at least superficially. But for me, that's only 50 percent of what matters. The other 50 percent - that's the magic, the mystery. It's what people conjure up here (taps his forehead).

You see, these days we talk about content all the time. Every company wants to create their own content, wants to have something to say. But what I find interesting about strong brands ... are the things they don't say. They allow consumers to write part of the story themselves. They allow them to dream, to wonder, to use their imagination.

Chanel, for example, decided last year that they would no longer let guests into the backstage area during fashion shows. There should be no more snapshots from behind the curtain, people should enjoy the show without knowing every little detail of the organization. When I heard that at the time, I thought to myself, "Chanel gets it!" That's exactly what good brands do. They maintain a certain level of mystery. Let's face it ... everyone knows people love that. Consumers are smart enough to understand deep down that not every glove or little jacket Chanel makes is made in Rue Cambon, but they enjoy the illusion.

These days, however, marketing rarely seems to focus on evoking mystique or desire. Performance indicators like click-through rates seem much more important. CMOs say, "If I can't measure it, I'm not paying for it."

Trying to measure performance of almost any kind is kind of idolized in the world we live in. I find it quite annoying that as soon as you get off a plane, you get an email from the airline inquiring about your flight ... or at the hotel asking you to rate your stay before you've even checked out! And of course, if you take a few minutes to fill out those little forms they provide you, your comments will be brought up in some quarterly meeting. Where they most likely won't make any significant improvements at all.

There is so much creative energy everywhere, a whole universe full of creative energy, and yet - isn't it strange that most people just want to count clicks?

But I think that's starting to change. The debate about the measurability of media impact has heated up quite a bit in 2019, and - you know, I do believe in these measurements, in the technology behind them; but do I trust what I'm being told about the performance of my brand if I'm just using KPIs? I think we'll see that the power of a campaign also depends on the depth of engagement, the quality of the target audience, and many other aspects that don't translate easily into numbers. I think - and this is the path we're on with Winkreative - that we'll soon get back to more independent thinking and independent ideas.

In this context, it would be very interesting to hear your opinion about agency networks. In a Interview with the Advertising Week Sir Martin Sorrell said in 2019 that consolidation - a phenomenon we are also seeing in Switzerland - is damaging creativity. Would you agree with that?  

No, not necessarily. I think there are still networks that come up with very powerful and effective ideas. But not necessarily because, as is the investors' point of view, there are so many shared resources and ideas and talents in them. Creativity just doesn't work that way. It's all about egos. But someone within a network can have an amazing idea and then the people around them continue to work with it.

From my own experience, I think that many of the big networks need to improve their internal communication. When we deal with global brands at Monocle, I'm always amazed at how little connection there is sometimes. When we're talking to the agency branch in Paris and then the team in Asia ... and one doesn't know what the other is doing ... you think to yourself, "Why isn't this in some database? I don't want to have to explain this over and over again!" (laughs).

And what also worries me - it's these trends that pop up and the networks all just seem to follow. You see something happening somewhere and then all of a sudden one of our clients' agencies gets in touch with the Monocle Add team to discuss the exact same thing. That's a danger to the creative process in advertising and to the formation of partnerships in general. You know, like when someone says, "Out-Of-Home is no longer trendy," or "You need to be on the next version of TikTok," or whatever. And because it's a trend, it seems kind of valid and it's done without anyone thinking about what the customer really gets out of it.

Speaking of trends: Please allow me to address some broader social issues as well. You've made Monocle a bastion of liberalism; a medium where sophisticated debates take place. In the age of populism, is there any place for that kind of thing anymore? 

More than ever. I think you're addressing an issue that is at the heart of what we want to talk about in the magazine. In fact, last week in London, we had a big discussion within the editorial board. How do we position ourselves as a company on the one hand and as a publishing entity on the other? It's nice that you already see us as a strong voice for liberalism. I think that's important. But I think it's equally important that our readers keep challenging us when they feel we're missing the mark.

I recently received a letter from a reader regarding our coverage of the BLM protests in Portland. We, of course, spoke out in support of BLM and against police violence, but this reader sent us a letter saying, "I read your article today, Tyler, and it was really pretty shallow. I am not a Trump supporter. I'm not a Republican, but I own storefronts in downtown Portland. And the protesters are operating outside of legal norms. When they riot, they hurt me because they break the infrastructure of the city." And I thought, you know what, that's an argument that can be made and something that should be questioned.

So... we will always be pragmatic. I think we will always be liberal. But we will be pro-business at the same time. I don't think we embrace the "quasi-liberalism" that assumes that any kind of free market economy is bad and businesses always just want to make a profit and the city trades parks for parking spaces. We have a more nuanced view on this. You can be pro-business, pay your taxes, and then the city builds people some nice parks with the taxes (laughs). When I say that in Zurich, I sometimes feel like a champagne socialist, but anyway, that's my view.

However, "nuanced" discourse seems to have become incredibly rare. 

Yes, I think the big problem is that most ... real public debates are nipped in the bud these days. Those who shout the loudest are automatically considered to have the "best argument. In social media, there is a climate in which discussions are usually doomed to fail; you end up belonging to either one group or the other. But there is no "in between" anymore.

I think we have to learn again to be controversial. That's why I'm so concerned about what's happening, especially in the English-speaking world, but also increasingly in Europe. If you no longer cultivate exchange, social cohesion erodes. And opinions don't always have to be absolute; it should be respected again that people differentiate.

I mean - to give you an example - the Romans were probably not a very nice people, and they had one of the most elaborate concepts of slavery. But do I automatically agree with the latter when I say, for example, that I like Roman statues? Should I rather demand, "Yes, the Romans were nasty, so let's bulldoze their artwork?" I would say "No," but there are people out there who think "Yes, absolutely!".

That's what I'm trying to describe when I talk about the need for nuanced judgments. Be it when we deal with history or with everything that happens nowadays.

What qualities do journalists need for this? 

First of all, they have to endure being unpopular (laughs). Since the beginning of this pandemic, when I've been writing, commenting, and hosting radio shows on Covid-19, the amount of really angry emails that I and other editors have received has been crazy at times. People would write us things like, "You guys are irresponsible, how dare you say that or even think that," and that seems to be the tone people are taking with each other today. Indignation. We have reached a level of deep disrespect and I wonder, why can't we have a civil conversation again? You may not agree with me, and that's fine, but I'm a journalist who tries to always report on things from different angles. I'm not trying to be reckless or irresponsible. But maybe I'll notice something in my research that you don't like. Maybe that challenges you - and maybe that's even a good thing?

Challenge people to question their preconceived notions: Do you see this as your task? 

We are a Swiss company. We are located in the heart of Europe. And I think what we are doing is more urgent today than ever before ...which increases the pressure but also the opportunities to make a difference in the world. We can talk to the investment banker in Geneva, to the psychologist in Berlin, or to the students in Rome, and make a point - liberalism, not only as an attitude in itself, but also as the statement that, especially in times of discord, there must be a free press.

When I look at Switzerland, I believe that quite a few newspapers are proud of their pragmatism. And I believe that pragmatism - as I said earlier - is indeed something to be proud of. It is an expression of a certain honesty. And it's also something that has been lost or is in serious danger in many, many countries ... countries where the media itself is as polarized as the public discourse. And that then is a serious threat to democracy. We see the consequences of the assumption that one side can impose its morality on the other side, for example, in the United States.

What do you want from the next generation of journalists in Switzerland, but also internationally?

I think we need a next generation of journalists and editors who do this job with more backbone and who can also abstract from their own opinion on a topic. We need journalists who don't fall prey to the mistaken belief that there is always only one right solution to a problem.

Last year, we had a great, very experienced editor come to Monocle headquarters, a real "veteran," to discuss the state of journalism with her. And she said something that stuck with me: "There are more and more people who confuse activism with journalism." I think that's the problem of our time: young writers come into an editorial environment, and where they should be asking the questions, they try to come up with their own answers. But we don't want answers from them - we want help finding our own answers.