You descend into an old bank vault. Down a narrow staircase. Into a long, brightly lit corridor. A man in black stands guard - ski mask on, baton in hand. A group hesitates at the threshold. Suddenly, he smashes a hole in the wall. He’s furious.

“I’m gonna do it,” a young woman mutters, and steps forward, passing him in the corridor and into the unknown. This isn’t a robbery. It’s performance art - one of many strange, unsettling exhibits at Dark Mofo, the festival of darkness that transforms Hobart each winter. Art bleeds into the streets. Light installations pulse through alleyways. The whole city leans into the weird.

But amidst all the chaos, one thing stuck with me: the tone of voice.
Every sign, quote, and snippet of copy was charged with personality.
Not just quirky or edgy but personal.

Dark Mofo often speaks in the first person.

Leaving the airport, you’re farewelled by a billboard: RETURN TO ME.
The website opens with Oscar Wilde: “The suspense is terrible. I hope it lasts.”

It shouldn’t work. But it does. The tone adds tension, intimacy and mystery. It deepens the experience. It lingers.

This week, we’re diving into that power.
The brands that dare to say ”I”.

I’m calling it…

This edition of supergoods is brought to you by Mind Control

So… why are brands talking like people?

Like any trend, it’s simple: because it works.

Well, at least, it did.

The first-person voice (“I”, “me”, “my”) makes brands feel human. It softens the cold, sterile vibe of corporate environments. Instead of “Company presents Product” it’s “Hi, I’m a cookie. Eat me”.

The pioneers of this approach are Innocent Drinks, who built their brand in the early 2000s with labels that sounded like your quirky best friend wrote them. And they never broke character. Everything from the side of pack to the underside of the lid had personality.

The result is that people actually read their packaging. People smiled. People bought smoothies.

Oatly doubled down in the 2010s, turning its oat milk cartons into a self-aware stream-of-consciousness. Whole panels of first-person copy. Jokes, reflections, ethical rants. Some people rolled their eyes. Others fell in love. But either way - they noticed.

But what does the data say?

The age old question that every savvy marketer throws out there - “I’m sure it’s been studied”. One study showed that when customer service reps used “I” instead of “we,” satisfaction scores went up - and so did sales.

Another packaging experiment found that when a product “spoke” in first person (like, “I’m made with 100% real fruit”), consumers were more likely to pay attention and pick it up.

Even if they found the tone annoying.
Even if it didn’t boost brand trust.
Even if they kind of hated it.

That’s the twist: annoyance doesn’t kill purchase intent.
In some cases, curiosity wins. People go, “Who the hell wrote this?” and next thing you know, it’s in the trolley.

A mini-case study

I’ve used this approach before for a brand we built, Undo This Mess.

We entered the boring category of home cleaning products with a personality driven brand, dialling up statements from the product itself, like front of pack copy leading with “I am made with plant-based ingredients”.

I truly believe this personality (along with design, packaging and broader 4 P’s marketing strategy) was critical to its success.

But when does it become too much?

Critics started calling this broader concept “wackaging”—wacky packaging. Think baby-talk copy, self-aware zingers, and forced whimsy. One writer described it as “brands treating consumers like children… or idiots.”

And yeah. Some of it’s bad.

Does your herbal tea really need to announce “Yippee-ki-yay mother cuppa.”, even if it is hilarious?

We get it. You’re quirky. You’re fun. But are you still a brand, or just a stand-up set with a barcode?

Lindt Chocolate had a crack at this approach back in 2013. Each flavour introduced itself and featured quirky, flirty lines like “Is it me you’re looking for?”.

It was slammed in the media as patronising and trying too hard to be cool. But for some, it resonated as a cute, playful experience different to traditional chocolate.

So do I, or don’t I?

Using “I” instead of “we” or “the brand” is a point-of-view choice.
It’s not just a tone - it’s a narrative decision. It turns the brand into a character. A person. A sentient, talking tub of yoghurt.

And that can be powerful, if it aligns with your positioning.

✅ Great for brands that want to be seen as approachable, cheeky, relatable, small-batch, or indie.

❌ Weird for brands that are meant to be scientific, serious, premium, or authoritative.

Imagine if Panadol said: “I’ll fix your headache, promise.”
No thanks. Give me the sterile box and the clinical language.

This stuff works when it feels true. When it matches the product and matches the audience.

It’s why Innocent pulls it off.
It’s why Oatly gets away with it.
And it’s why Lindt Hello felt off for some people - flirty chocolate bars are either cute or cringe, depending on your mood and blood sugar levels.

If you’re gonna do it, commit to the bit.

When a brand says “I,” it stops being a product and starts being a persona. That can make it feel special, ownable, alive.

But here’s the kicker:
You still need something worth saying.

Personality is not positioning.
Voice is not value.

So, if your packaging is going to speak…
Make it matter.
Make it human.
But for god’s sake, make it clear where the cooking instructions are…