Respect stakeholders or feel the pain. Brand lessons for Jaguar and The Guardian

At first glance, it might seem absurd to compare the sale of a 240-year-old newspaper to the rebranding of a luxury automotive company. But dig deeper, and the parallels become striking. Both are legacy brands wrestling with their identities in a rapidly changing world. Both are attempting to chart new courses, but in ways that risk alienating the very people who are the lifeblood of their existence.

Brands as shared heritage

The Guardian and Observer, with its 464 striking journalists fighting against what they see as a betrayal of the values that have defined these papers for centuries. The Scott Trust may legally “own” these brands, but ask the journalists or the readers who sustain them, and you’ll hear a very different story. The papers are not just assets; they are symbols of press freedom, integrity, and liberal journalism. Selling The Observer to a financially precarious startup like Tortoise Media is not just a bad business decision—it’s an existential threat to the values that have kept these papers relevant for generations.

Similarly, Jaguar’s recent rebrand, marked by a confusing new visual identity and a botched communication strategy, has left loyalists scratching their heads. For decades, Jaguar has stood for British elegance and engineering excellence. It was never just about the cars—it was about what those cars represented. By veering into the abstract with slogans like 'Copy Nothing' and abandoning the heritage that made it iconic, Jaguar risks driving away its most ardent supporters.

The illusion of ownership

What these stories reveal is that ownership is, in many ways, an illusion. Legally, The Guardian belongs to the Scott Trust, and Jaguar to its corporate stakeholders. But the true owners of these brands are the people who pour their passion into them. The journalists and readers of The Guardian, the employees and customers of Jaguar—they are the ones who sustain these institutions, who invest their trust, loyalty, and, yes, money.

This dynamic is not unique to media or automotive brands. Look at football clubs, where fans often feel a deeper sense of ownership than the actual board members. When Newcastle United fans celebrated their team’s renaissance, it wasn’t because of a clever marketing campaign; it was because they saw themselves reflected in the club’s success. And when owners ignore this emotional ownership, as we’ve seen with so many failed attempts to create European super leagues, the backlash is swift and brutal.

When bold is necessary

But what happens when brands reach a point where sustaining the old way of doing things is no longer viable? There are moments when bold, even controversial decisions must be made—decisions that risk alienating existing stakeholders in order to secure the brand’s future. This is the tightrope that brand leaders must walk.

For The Guardian, the argument for selling The Observer is rooted in concerns about long-term sustainability. Management claims the Sunday paper could become a financial liability within three years. If that is true, the responsible course of action might be to find a new model—even if it means upsetting the journalists and readers who have long supported the paper.

Jaguar, too, faces a rapidly shifting landscape. The automotive industry is racing toward electrification, and legacy brands like Jaguar must compete not just with traditional rivals but with innovative newcomers like Tesla. To remain relevant, Jaguar must redefine itself for a new generation of consumers. That may mean leaving behind some of its traditional loyalists.

Drastic measures require thoughtful execution

However, such drastic actions should not be undertaken lightly. Before alienating existing stakeholders, brand leaders must be certain that the change is necessary and that the path forward is clear. Transparency, communication, and engagement are critical. Stakeholders may not like the decisions being made, but they are far more likely to accept them if they understand the rationale.

This is where both The Guardian and Jaguar have faltered. The Guardian’s secretive negotiations with Tortoise Media have left its journalists and readers feeling betrayed. Jaguar’s chaotic rebrand has confused loyalists and undermined its credibility. In both cases, the lack of clarity and engagement has turned potential supporters into vocal critics.

Stakeholders are the brand

The lesson here is simple but profound: brands are nothing without the people who believe in them. Whether it’s a journalist at The Guardian, a lifelong Jaguar driver, or a football fan in the stands, these are the stakeholders who breathe life into a brand. Ignore them at your peril.

But leadership also means knowing when to make tough calls. When the old ways no longer work, brands must have the courage to change. The key is to balance bold decisions with respect for the people who have brought the brand this far. Because at the end of the day, a brand is not a logo or a legal entity. It is a promise—a promise that must be kept, even as it evolves.

If The Guardian and Jaguar can strike this balance, they may yet secure their futures. But if they fail to bring their stakeholders along on the journey, they risk becoming cautionary tales in the annals of branding history.

Read more opinion on The Drum.