Find out about all the possibilities for your brand
Leave your contact and we will contact you within one business day
By clicking on button, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and our Privacy Policy
Mascots Part 1: Why did every brand seem to have a mascot
in the 90s?
And why do we see fewer of them today?
A quick look into the past
Ask anyone to picture advertising from the 80s and 90s and a whole cast shows up almost instantly: Tony the Tiger, Chester Cheetah, the Kool-Aid Man bursting through a wall, the Michelin Man, Joe Camel, the M&M's characters mid-argument.
Mascots were everywhere.
Then, somewhere along the way, they seemed to quietly leave the room. Fewer new characters, fewer campaigns built around them, fewer brands introducing a face to speak on their behalf. It's tempting to read that as a verdict – that mascots were a product of their era, and the era ended.
But what if we say that they never actually went anywhere. They simply changed their job.
Mascots were everywhere.
Then, somewhere along the way, they seemed to quietly leave the room. Fewer new characters, fewer campaigns built around them, fewer brands introducing a face to speak on their behalf. It's tempting to read that as a verdict – that mascots were a product of their era, and the era ended.
But what if we say that they never actually went anywhere. They simply changed their job.
Why were mascots everywhere?
Short answer? Television.
For decades, TV was one of the few ways to reach a mass audience at all, and a product shot or a logo could only do so much inside thirty seconds. A mascot gave a brand something more practical: someone to introduce the brand. A character who could turn up in different situations, carry a joke, come back campaign after campaign. And be remembered.
M&M's is the textbook version. When the brand turned individual sweets into animated characters in the 1990s, it wasn't adding decoration; it gave each colour a personality and, with it, a distinctive way to tell stories about the product. Red, Yellow and the rest weren't there to look nice on the bag. They became the way the brand talked about itself.
For decades, TV was one of the few ways to reach a mass audience at all, and a product shot or a logo could only do so much inside thirty seconds. A mascot gave a brand something more practical: someone to introduce the brand. A character who could turn up in different situations, carry a joke, come back campaign after campaign. And be remembered.
M&M's is the textbook version. When the brand turned individual sweets into animated characters in the 1990s, it wasn't adding decoration; it gave each colour a personality and, with it, a distinctive way to tell stories about the product. Red, Yellow and the rest weren't there to look nice on the bag. They became the way the brand talked about itself.
Then the internet happened
And the ground shifted under all of it.
Brands stopped depending on a handful of television channels, print ads and billboards. Almost overnight they had websites, social media, influencers, short-form video, memes, communities and a dozen other ways to reach people – most of them two-directional, fast-moving and impossible to fully script.
A character whose entire job was to stand next to the product and deliver a slogan suddenly had far less to do. The format that made mascots so useful in the first place – controlled, one-way, endlessly repeated – was exactly the format losing its grip.
Brands stopped depending on a handful of television channels, print ads and billboards. Almost overnight they had websites, social media, influencers, short-form video, memes, communities and a dozen other ways to reach people – most of them two-directional, fast-moving and impossible to fully script.
A character whose entire job was to stand next to the product and deliver a slogan suddenly had far less to do. The format that made mascots so useful in the first place – controlled, one-way, endlessly repeated – was exactly the format losing its grip.
Think mascots are dead? Think again.
They simply got a bigger job. The strongest modern mascots are not just talking heads now, the don’t deliver slogans anymore. They behave less like advertising props and more like brand personalities.
Look at Duolingo's Duo. Duo isn't simply an illustration dropped into ads. Instead it constantly communicates with the audience. It has a defined personality, a tone of voice, a set of behaviours and even rules for how it should communicate – Duolingo's own brand guidelines describe Duo as the most recognisable element of the brand and spell out, in detail, how it should act and speak.
Look at Duolingo's Duo. Duo isn't simply an illustration dropped into ads. Instead it constantly communicates with the audience. It has a defined personality, a tone of voice, a set of behaviours and even rules for how it should communicate – Duolingo's own brand guidelines describe Duo as the most recognisable element of the brand and spell out, in detail, how it should act and speak.
That's exactly why Duo works so well on social media. It can react to a trend, land a joke, argue with people in the comments and take part in internet culture – and the content still reads, unmistakably, as Duolingo.
That's what we built for Liliko.
That's what we built for Liliko.
Instead of simply delivering a slogan, the mascot actively communicates with customers across the brand experience. Its different micro-emotions let it react and express personality, while its presence in digital stickers, shopping bags, pastry boxes, cups and banners keeps that conversation going both online and offline.
The mascot has effectively moved from being a character in the advertising to a character inside the brand itself.
And that distinction is the whole point.
The mascot has effectively moved from being a character in the advertising to a character inside the brand itself.
And that distinction is the whole point.
The test most mascots quietly fail
Picture a brand mascot you genuinely like. Now name the brand it belongs to. Most likely you will. Because those mascots, who are genuinely effective, have a strong connection with the company they represent.
But think about some local, smaller mascots. Can you name the brand it represents? For a lot of characters, it’s not the case. People remember some cheerful animated blob – and go blank on who was actually paying for it. It's the oldest failure in advertising: everyone loved the spot, nobody could tell you whose it was.
And it turns out to be the norm, not the exception. In a global Ipsos and JKR study of more than 26,000 people, only 16% of the mascots tested reached the top "Gold" tier of distinctiveness – the level where a character is reliably, almost automatically linked back to its brand. The other 84% were doing something closer to entertainment than branding.
But think about some local, smaller mascots. Can you name the brand it represents? For a lot of characters, it’s not the case. People remember some cheerful animated blob – and go blank on who was actually paying for it. It's the oldest failure in advertising: everyone loved the spot, nobody could tell you whose it was.
And it turns out to be the norm, not the exception. In a global Ipsos and JKR study of more than 26,000 people, only 16% of the mascots tested reached the top "Gold" tier of distinctiveness – the level where a character is reliably, almost automatically linked back to its brand. The other 84% were doing something closer to entertainment than branding.
A character has to come from somewhere
The 84% don't fail because nobody could draw. They fail because the character wasn't built from anything – it was chosen because a brief somewhere said "we should have a mascot", and an arbitrary character is exactly the kind that peels off and floats away.
The ones that stick are almost never arbitrary. The Michelin Man is made of tyres. Tony the Tiger doesn't just endorse the cereal – he is the promise on the box, the energy, the "they're grrreat". Each of them carries something the brand already wanted to say, which is precisely why you can't quietly swap them out.
That's the real difference between a drawing and a brand asset, and it's a branding decision long before it's an illustration one. A character that's going to hold up needs a clear role, a personality, a consistent tone and genuine rules for how it behaves – not to look polished, but so it stays the same character every time it appears.
The ones that stick are almost never arbitrary. The Michelin Man is made of tyres. Tony the Tiger doesn't just endorse the cereal – he is the promise on the box, the energy, the "they're grrreat". Each of them carries something the brand already wanted to say, which is precisely why you can't quietly swap them out.
That's the real difference between a drawing and a brand asset, and it's a branding decision long before it's an illustration one. A character that's going to hold up needs a clear role, a personality, a consistent tone and genuine rules for how it behaves – not to look polished, but so it stays the same character every time it appears.
And "every time" is doing a lot of work there. A mascot that only ever lives in one format never really gets tested. The character we built for Hot 8 had to hold together across the brand's whole world – on a screen, in print, and in the physical space itself, where there's no caption to explain it and nowhere to hide. That's usually where you find out whether a character is genuinely owned by the brand or just passing through.
How we see it at NZR
We treat brand chatacters in exactly this broader way.
A brand is not just a logo. It's a system of visual and verbal elements that work together – and, when it genuinely fits, a character becomes one of those elements rather than an extra sitting beside them.
The most successful mascots don't sit outside the identity as a piece of decoration. They become part of the identity itself.
A brand is not just a logo. It's a system of visual and verbal elements that work together – and, when it genuinely fits, a character becomes one of those elements rather than an extra sitting beside them.
The most successful mascots don't sit outside the identity as a piece of decoration. They become part of the identity itself.
In short
Maybe that's why mascots never really disappeared.
They just stopped being characters that sell the product for thirty seconds – and became characters that make the brand feel alive: recognisable, consistent, and connected to one brand in a way no product shot ever manages on its own.
Thinking about introducing a mascot to your brand? Get in touch with our team, and let's explore what makes a character memorable, recognisable, and unmistakably connected to the brand it represents.
They just stopped being characters that sell the product for thirty seconds – and became characters that make the brand feel alive: recognisable, consistent, and connected to one brand in a way no product shot ever manages on its own.
Thinking about introducing a mascot to your brand? Get in touch with our team, and let's explore what makes a character memorable, recognisable, and unmistakably connected to the brand it represents.