m&k: Stefan Mennerich, how would you describe the «FC Bayern Munich» brand?

Stefan Mennerich is Director of Media and Communications at FC Bayern Munich. Previously, he served as Managing Director of FC Bayern Digital & Media Lab GmbH and held leadership positions at the digital soccer platforms «OneFootball» and «Dugout.».

Childhood in the Flight Path

Let’s start in Bachenbülach, the Kloten flight path, an industrial district. Sarah is the oldest of three children. Her brother will be born two years later, and Meta eight years after Sarah. Her parents, the Hiltebrands, work a lot, leaving Sarah to deal with her boredom on her own. There aren’t many children in the neighborhood with whom Sarah wants to play, but she feels at home in her room. She is a quiet, shy child. Her boredom becomes a springboard for her creativity. Sarah paints. She paints everything, all the time, and she becomes very good at it. And without even realizing it, she has laid the foundation for her creative work. She does well in school, listens attentively, and soaks everything up. In dodgeball, she’s the last one to be picked; PE isn’t her favorite subject, but she’s fine with that. By age 16, she’s already earning money with her own paintings. She exhibits her work, holds art openings, and fights to be allowed to attend art school in Biel. Her parents are, to put it mildly, opposed to the idea; they see art as a dead-end career. Sarah earns the money for her dream through part-time jobs; she learns early on to budget carefully, focus on what’s essential, and keep her eyes on the prize.

Meta is born eight years later. As the youngest of three children, she’s never alone and never gets bored. She’s the complete opposite of Sarah. Loud and colorful, she only shines in sports and music class; all her other school subjects are a nightmare. Meta doesn’t shine because of her achievements, but because of her «great charm.» She’s always on the go and has lots of friends. Always on the go? That makes Sarah roll her eyes. Because as the older sister, little Meta was often a handful. «Take your sister with you,» was her parents« standard refrain whenever Sarah left the house. After finishing school, Meta tried out various jobs—all of them a »No, thanks!« But then she ended up in the kitchen and knew: »Yes, definitely.” As little as her focus had been on studying during her school years, she now soaks everything up like a sponge; she breezes through vocational school as well and completes her training as a chef with flying colors. Both sisters have found their calling in their own ways.

Sarah Sharpens Meta's Brand

At just 18 years old, Meta already has her own website and, of course, a business card. Who do you think designed them? Exactly. Her sister Sarah. «Just the basics,» she says, laughing. As the older sister, Sarah always keeps a watchful eye on Meta and recognizes early on that Meta stands out as a cook, but that her talent, combined with distinctive features (the orange hair is Sarah’s doing) and reach (56,000 followers on Instagram), could turn her into a brand that’s easier to market. Of course—that’s Sarah’s job. Sarah became a commercial advertiser and, together with her partner Reto Dürrenberger, founded the agency «Werbeanstalt»—now known as “Die Antwort.” So it’s only natural that she wants to give “Super Content”—as she calls Meta’s talent—a proper package and position it as a distinctive brand. But it’s much more than just a job; as Meta’s big sister, Sarah is always a safe haven and a point of contact. She’s the voice Meta listens to, even when it hurts.

Family Ties

Meta becomes Zurich’s youngest head chef. She works hard. In her personal life, she’s in a relationship that takes a heavy toll on her. The two of them spend more money than they have and live beyond their means. When the relationship falls apart, Meta is left with a mountain of debt. And she ends up at Sarah’s doorstep. Her older sister steps in, gives her a stern talking-to, helps her out of the debt trap, and teaches Meta how to manage her finances. Meta moves in temporarily with Sarah and Reto. She licks her wounds, picks herself up, and gets back on track. As a creative top chef, she forges her own path. She opens her own restaurant: Le Chef. She works day and night. In the years that follow, Meta does less and less of what she does best: cooking. Instead, she has her hands full managing her team, handling administrative tasks, and poring over financial statements. It’s frustrating. Then, when the lockdown hits, guests stop coming, and the financial statements slip into the red, her balance is completely thrown off. At the same time, she meets a man who turns her life upside down in a positive way and makes her question everything.

Meta makes some decisions. It feels like she’s grown up. Of course, she also talks it over with her sister. She decides to close the restaurant. These are painful moments. «I was at home for a month, didn’t go out—I was devastated.» But thanks to her new partner and Sarah, a light shines through the darkness. She decides to open a cooking studio; a website and business cards are created. By whom? You get three guesses. In the trendy 5th district, in the Viadukte, Meta opens the cooking studio «CookCouture.» A cooking studio where she’s close to people again, cooks herself, teaches classes, and above all: has different working hours. Because with her new partner by her side, Meta wants to find a healthier balance between work and her personal life. It does her good to have a private “Meta” retreat alongside her bright orange “Master Chef” brand.

She has now also established herself as a TV chef. She’s in high demand, gets invited to appear on shows, and impresses viewers not only with her creative culinary skills but also with her «charm.» She gives Tim Mälzer a run for his money on his cooking show «Kitchen Impossible,» wins the duel, and makes a name for herself in the international culinary world as a top chef.

Sarah is the anchor of the family

It becomes clear that Meta is extremely grateful to her sister. Throughout the conversation, Meta repeatedly emphasizes the specific situations in which her older sister helped steer her back on track. And then she says this: «I definitely wouldn’t be where I am today without my sister.» That really hits home. Sarah is slightly overwhelmed; with a moved expression and without saying a word, she gives her sister Meta a long hug.

Sarah is always there for her sister. But she makes a point of only offering advice when asked. Sarah doesn’t meddle in her little sister’s life; it’s Meta who shows up at the door every now and then to ask for advice. And when she does, there are always productive solutions. «If you want pity, don’t go to Sarah; if you want solutions, she’s the one to turn to,» says Meta, looking lovingly at her sister.

Sarah has forged her own path with determination. Together with her partner Reto, she built up the agency Werbeanstalt. Five years ago, they renamed the agency «Die Antwort.» «Today, we no longer need advertising; we need solutions—and thus answers,» says Sarah. It’s that simple. Sarah sees herself as down-to-earth, almost old-fashioned. Although: she hasn’t gotten married—a wild, independent relationship fits better into her worldview. Reto and Sarah have a daughter. She loves her life, the stability, the creativity. But when it comes to cooking, she can get a little frustrated. «Lila, my daughter, thinks I can’t even make fried eggs,» she says with a laugh. Aunt Meta can take care of that. «Reto is a great cook—he doesn’t need me,» Meta says immediately.

«Rent a Retiree»

It’s not just Meta who turns to Sarah for advice; other family members also seek her creative counsel. Her father, Papa Hiltebrand, visited Bertastrasse in Zurich a few years ago—the headquarters of the agency Die Antwort. As a recent retiree, he was looking for a way to continue feeling needed. Sarah, along with Reto and him, came up with the idea for an online job portal for retirees called «Rent a Rentner.» Retirees—or as Sarah casually puts it, «old geezers and old ladies»—can be «rented» for jobs. When her father then starts looking for a new love—Sarah and Meta’s parents are divorced—the idea for the next retiree portal is born: «Date a Retiree.» Tinder for «old geezers and old hags»? “Yes, exactly, but much better,” Sarah is certain. No subscription traps, no passwords—everything is very transparent and without any hidden fine print.

With «Rent a Rentner,» they’ve been racking up awards—twice at the national level with the Marketing Trophy and internationally with the Silvereco, which they received in Tokyo. As world champions among all retiree organizations. There’s even a «speed dating event,» which Meta helps organize. The two laugh as they recall it. «They exchanged phone numbers after talking for two minutes, and some even went home together right after the event.» While sexual preferences might be the first topic at other speed-dating events, for seniors, it’s their health conditions that are checked first. The platforms are still doing well.

On Equal Footing

Since so many things have changed in Meta’s life, her routine has shifted quite a bit as well. For the better, as Meta says with a broad grin. «I enjoy cooking, talking, and relaxing with my partner in the evenings.» Sure, she still goes to clubs every now and then and enjoys the nightlife, but overall, a healthy balance has developed. The two sisters aren’t together 24/7—she doesn’t want to give that impression. There are months when they each go their own way; both are very busy. But Meta enjoys the moments spent sitting together with Sarah, Lila, and Reto as a family. Her sister enjoys that, too. Now the two of them meet and talk about everything. In the past, there was often only one topic: Meta’s problems. Now Meta has just one assistant who helps her out in the cooking studio. Meta signed the lease without Sarah, and she did the entire interior design herself. «I was so excited when Sarah walked in for the first time.» Sarah loves the look. And she’s so proud of her little sister.

Sarah likes to go home, relax, take the dog for a walk, and play with her daughter—that's all she needs. She'd love to be bored again sometime; then she'd get back to painting.

Meta is a bundle of surprises; she has found happiness in cooking—and with her partner. Both women have found their place in life.

Anna Kohler, co-editor-in-chief of *Werbewoche m&k*, met with Sarah and Meta Hiltebrand in the podcast studio.

Reliable or not?

Just how reliable the results from market research firms still are in turbulent times depends heavily on the topic and the survey methods, says Stefan Reiser, Managing Director of Market Research at Link. Of course, the coronavirus, for example, has significantly changed people’s attitudes and behaviors in many areas. «Such »game changers« can, of course, render forecasts useless,» the executive admits. “For the most part, however, we research the opinions, preferences, and attitudes that currently prevail—rarely those of the day after tomorrow.”

Link is the Swiss institute that offers all survey methods, including online, written, telephone, and in-person surveys, as well as qualitative research, observations, and AI-based analytical methods that do not require surveys.

«A tendency to say »yes'"?

Brand expert Oliver Errichiello argues that people aren’t really honest in surveys, but simply say what others want to hear. So do opinion polls miss the mark? Stefan Reiser is convinced that if the questions and survey methods are designed correctly, response biases—such as the «social desirability» or «yes-man tendency» mentioned in the question—can be completely ruled out.

GfK does not conduct opinion polls; instead, it provides data-driven insights. The insights that GfK’s clients receive are primarily based on data generated using complex data science methods supported by AI. «This makes our insights robust and reliable,» says Ludovit Szabo, CEO of GfK Switzerland. «We’re not interested in what people want, but in what they do.» GfK then uses this information to derive recommendations for its clients.

The Zug-based company has also seen an increase in inquiries from marketing professionals. This is because they have a growing need for reliable data in a world that changes every day. More than a year ago, the business intelligence provider therefore launched its new AI-powered platform, «gfknewron.» This tool offers constant access to the latest market insights. «This is our response to exactly this need among marketing managers,» explains the 61-year-old CEO and Commercial Director. Ludovit Szabo describes «gfknewron» as GfK’s core product, which the company now aims to further develop to market readiness as quickly as possible.

«Do-it-yourself» principle

Deeptrue has also made market research in the age of widespread digitalization its mission. The Swiss company has developed an automated, scalable solution for real-time, quantitative market surveys. These surveys can be conducted globally. This enables data-driven marketing decisions based on empirically collected data to be made within a matter of hours.

The Instant Insights platform is a 100 percent automated and digital SaaS platform for conducting B2C and B2B surveys. Like GfK, Deeptrue does not conduct opinion polls but rather consumer research. Survey projects can be set up within ten minutes. Customers receive initial results after just 20 minutes. Does that mean you have to do everything yourself at Deeptrue? According to Klaus Ammon, Chairman of the Board of Directors at Deeptrue, the focus is on convenience and speed while still delivering valid results: «Do-it-yourself is an element of convenience for us.»

The biggest challenge right now is convincing customers of Deeptrue’s quality through an initial trial. «So far, all clients have been thrilled after the first test,» says Andreas Logk, CEO of the company, which was founded in 2020.

Currently, inflation is an issue that has only recently—in the last few months—become a focal point for clients. «In particular, management overload and the resulting reluctance to explore new avenues are holding things back,» Logk explains. However, the increasing demands for lower costs and faster implementation of planned projects are also acting as brakes. This is because decision-makers are taking—or are able to take—less and less time to carefully analyze their own starting point, their objectives, and the market, including the competition.

A Fig Leaf for Executives

Brand sociologist Oliver Errichiello knows that market research today is not used solely to analyze markets. «Market research today is also the fig leaf that executives need to justify their decisions,» says the professor, who teaches in Lucerne. More and more senior managers are using it as a way to protect themselves. If things go wrong, these marketing executives can simply say that this was unforeseeable because the market research had predicted something entirely different. «That way, as a manager, I can conveniently delegate responsibility to the results of market research.» Errichiello describes this as an admission of failure on the part of entrepreneurship—or rather, of such executives. In the past, he notes, there were still entrepreneurs who made decisions because they had a gut feeling about it—or simply because it was in their blood. These days, everyone just asks whether something has already been «tested,» explains the founder of the «Office for Brand Development» in Hamburg. «If you go to a public company today and say, »We’re going to do it this way because it’s simply the right thing to do,’ everyone just stares at you with wide eyes.” Oliver Errichiello can well imagine that in times of business uncertainty, market research will be expanded even further, because it would allow executives to put their decisions on a more solid footing.

Market Research: What's the Point?

1. Early warning function: Market research ensures that risks are identified early on and made predictable.

2. Innovation function: Market research helps identify and anticipate opportunities and trends.

3. Intelligence Enhancer: Market research contributes to the decision-making process by supporting the work of corporate management.

4. Reducing uncertainty: Market research helps to clarify and objectively assess the facts during the decision-making process.

5. Structuring function: Market research promotes understanding in goal-setting and learning processes within the company.

6. Selection function: Market research ensures that relevant information is selected and processed from the flood of information.

INTERVIEW with Prof. Oliver Errichiello, brand sociologist

m&k: What are the biggest challenges facing market research right now?

Oliver Errichiello: The issue of «just-in-time» measurements in digital channels is the «top topic.» For many companies, these have now replaced in-depth market research. What do these tools measure? Deeply rooted patterns within the collective, or fleeting shifts in the zeitgeist?

And what, specifically, should be measured?

If market research is understood as the measurement of short-term reactions, it naturally yields highly volatile results. However, market research only makes sense if it identifies habitual patterns over the long term. Reactions can be obtained quickly, but they fade just as quickly. No company can operate in a financially sound manner if it merely «plays it by ear.» After all, generating reactions is expensive.

Does the audience being surveyed know what it wants, even though everything around them is constantly changing?

I don’t believe that people are constantly changing. Real habits hardly change at all, and when they do, it’s extremely slow. Here’s an example: You might think that the whole world now eats only organically grown food and follows a vegan diet. But in reality, only one percent of people are vegan. I believe that much less is changing than what we perceive through the media. After all, the media always reports only on what’s «new»—that’s their raison d’être.

But it's generally assumed that consumers are always looking for something new and special.

That may be true for younger target groups. Older people, on the other hand, change their choice-making and selection behavior relatively little. Only a very small portion of the ways we make choices are new and innovative. The more confusing, complex, and fast-paced the world becomes, the more we rely on what is familiar.

So should we focus less on the boys, then?

Young people have little time and little money. Time and again, people say, «Help, our customer base is too old,» and a ruthless «modernization strategy» is pursued. The result: The older customers—that is, the ones with the money—are driven away, and the younger generation isn’t buying into the «old brand’s» rejuvenation efforts. You end up losing everyone.

m&k: Hans Ulrich Obrist, you have often collaborated with the late poet Etel Adnan. She once said: «Love in all its forms is the most important matter we will ever face, but also the most dangerous, the most unpredictable, the most maddening. But it is also the only salvation I know of.» Would you agree with her unreservedly—replacing «love» with «art»—or would you have something entirely different to say on the matter?

Hans Ulrich Obrist: Oh, there are so many wonderful quotes from Etel. You’ll find more than fifty on my Instagram page alone, and this canon includes not only the one you just mentioned—but also the following: «The world needs togetherness, not separation. Love, not suspicion. A common future, not isolation.» In fact, I believe that this captures almost everything that matters in the world today—and especially when it comes to curating exhibitions and creating art. We live in a polarized society. On a planet where we can only solve the enormous challenges we face if we rise above the silos of individual fields of knowledge. And if we can do that—as Etel says—with love, then I agree with her. Art can be a vehicle for this, or, to quote another saying, this time from Gerhard Richter, «…the highest form of hope.».

You are considered one of the most important curators of our time. You yourself just mentioned that we are living in an era of transformation and polarization. How does that affect your work?

As we speak, I’m walking through Kensington Gardens in London. This is where the Serpentine’s main building is located; I serve as its artistic director. And here we strive to base our work—in part as a response to the crises of our time—on three pillars: ecology, technology, and civil society. Now you might say, «Mr. Obrist, there’s hardly a museum in the world that isn’t currently addressing ecology!» And that’s true on the one hand, but on the other hand, we’re trying not only to organize exhibitions on the topics that matter to us but also to initiate structural changes—in other words, to go much, much deeper. We have a curator and our own team that organizes interdisciplinary conferences centered on ecological issues. The same goes for the field of technology: We’ve hired five young curators who are exploring the metaverse and gamification, going far beyond individual exhibitions or performances. They’re building worlds where artists can work and establishing collaborations—for example, with Google. The third pillar is the «outreach» to society that art must provide. I’ve always said—and this remains my proposal to governments, boards of directors, and companies—that artists should actually be sitting at the table wherever decisions are made. As long as that is not the case, we—through galleries and museums—hold the key to public awareness in our hands—and bring art into society.

And in doing so, they are once again acting «inwardly,» that is, within the art world.

Yes, and in two ways at once. Especially in this day and age, it’s really important that we support new, very young artists at the start of their careers. This also stems from my own background: I grew up in Switzerland, studied at the University of St. Gallen (HSG), and organized my first exhibition when I was 22 or 23. I showed works by Fischli/Weiss and others in my kitchen. A total of 29 visitors came (laughs); among them was the director of the Cartier Foundation in Paris. And he invited me to take part in a residency in Paris and curate an exhibition. That changed my life. Without that support I received right at the very beginning, I probably would never have been able to do most of the things that came later. In other words, I’ve always been aware of how important it is to support creative people right at the start of their careers—before they become well-known.

Your institution is open not only to this, but also to artists whose work has tended to be «overlooked» by a large portion of the public until now.

Yes, you’d be surprised! In particular, there are numerous women who have never really received the recognition they deserve. All over the world. People know Louise Bourgeois, but there are so many more women artists from that generation and beyond whose work we’re now systematically exploring: for example, we exhibited Maria Lassnig at the Serpentine Galleries quite early on, ten or fifteen years ago. And now we have two exhibitions featuring incredible women artists. Barbara Chase-Riboud is an African American sculptor, writer, and poet; for example, she wrote a very important book about Sally Hamings. She has written poetry, created monuments to Malcolm X… in that sense, she is one of the very, very few who combine literature and the visual arts in this way. She’s in her eighties now. And it’s unbelievable that there’s never been a retrospective on such an important figure! The same goes for Kamala Ibrahim Ishag: the greatest African painter of her generation, yet there’s never been an exhibition of her work in Europe! This means our task is also to showcase art as a protest against oblivion—and to correct and expand art history; to make it more just and diverse.

So does the art of our time have to be «committed»—have a purpose, a goal—rather than simply appearing «beautiful»?

It would be wrong to put it in such absolute terms. In art, there have always been different reactions to the era in which the art in question was created. I mean, if you look at World War II: in the 1930s, for example, there were artists like Matisse and Picasso. How did they react to the war? Matisse continued to paint his flowers and still lifes. Picasso, on the other hand, created «Guernica.» And both approaches were valid. With an institution like the Serpentine, we’re committed to transformative movements, but—we also continue to exhibit works that perhaps more closely align with the aesthetic ideal you allude to in your question under the term «beautiful.» And that brings us back to Richter’s idea of the «highest form of hope»: During World War II, when bombs were falling on London, the works from the collections were moved to safe locations outside the city. Yet time and again—at great risk to the pieces themselves—individual works were brought back and exhibited; and people lined up to see them. That gave them hope.

Earlier, you said, «Artists should really be sitting at the table wherever decisions are made.» What kind of genuine, independent thinking could they bring to governments or boards of directors?

(Thinks for a moment) What term would you use to translate the English word «pivot»?

A turning point. A turnaround, perhaps.

A turnaround! Thank you—that’s exactly what I was looking for. I mean, that’s the point: When you talk to CEOs today, you don’t really find a single company that says, «Oh, we don’t need a turnaround!» In fact, the opposite is true. A lot of things just don’t work anymore—even from a purely ecological or geopolitical standpoint. A great many companies depend on certain countries they can no longer do business with. Supply chains have ground to a halt. So much needs to be reinvented. And who would be better suited than artists to bring about these U-turns? To create new rules of the game?! The metaverse worlds being created for art at the Serpentine Gallery are practically congruent with the gamification approaches that international companies are experimenting with. So this exchange is already inherent in the nature of the matter. Incidentally, there was a time in Europe—in the 1960s and 1970s—when art gained some influence in politics and the economy. While many people viewed artists as «a little crazy» (laughs)—as figures with utopian ideas—Helmut Schmidt, first as a German minister and then as chancellor, met with them regularly. Or think of Joseph Beuys, whose ideal of an expanded concept of art—extended all the way into the social sphere!—continues to have an impact to this day through his role as a co-founder of the Green Party in Germany.

You once said that when companies and artists collaborate, the partnership must be designed to be sustainable. What did you mean by that?

Some sectors of the economy realize that they need art—but do they realize it enough? The fashion industry, for example, has artists design fashion shows; Santiago Sierra was recently all over the headlines with his Balenciaga runway show. Indeed: very exciting. But once such a project is completed, are the artists simply «discarded» and someone else hired for a new project? Wouldn’t it be more interesting to establish collaborations not just on an ad hoc basis, but on a long-term basis? Just as some Italian fashion houses did thirty or forty years ago—and then, in some cases, worked with the same artists for decades. This fostered wonderful synergies that would never have been possible with three- or six-month contracts. As you can see, my thinking revolves around sustainability in a wide variety of ways.

Can you elaborate on that?

On the one hand, an ontological shift is taking place—in both the analog and digital worlds: sustainable art is losing its immutability and entering a phase of continuous evolution. A metaverse as a work of art continues to grow indefinitely; it may be released to the public at a certain point—but modifications will still take place afterward. A game is experienced, even while it is being programmed, as a kind of digital organism. Evolving organisms, in fact! It’s no coincidence that more and more artists we speak with want to create their own gardens in our wonderful park. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg has done just that with her «Pollinator Pathmaker,» which explores the microcosm of the flower meadow from the perspective of bees. And this is happening globally as well: in Nigeria, for example, Yinka Shonibare runs an artist residency in Lagos and a farm in the countryside where one can work in and with nature. Museums must take very seriously the idea that works of art are becoming living organisms—not simply shipped from location to location, but developing and growing in a fixed place. «Business as usual» is no longer an option.

Does that bring us to the second aspect of sustainability that you mentioned earlier?

Yes. To go back to the way things were after the COVID lockdowns and say, «Now we’ll have five exhibitions a year again»—that wouldn’t be right. Every morning when I wake up, I think about how the whole culture of events—the exhibitions, conferences, symposia… everything we’ve organized—hasn’t been sustainable. We need to radically change that; we need to think about longer-term formats. On a small scale, that might mean extending the duration of exhibitions, as we’re doing with Barbara Chase-Riboud. Her work was originally scheduled to be shown for two months at the Serpentine Galleries, but we’ve extended it to six months. With other artists, we’re considering whether to show only works in retrospectives that are available on the European continent—that is, works that can be obtained through short supply chains.

Your thinking is characterized by a refreshing lack of boundaries. You effortlessly bring together art, literature, technology, architecture—and so on. Where does this belief in the «power of synthesis» come from?

This brings us full circle, in a way, to Etel Adnan’s opening quote: «… togetherness, not separation.» In art history, I’ve always found those moments particularly fascinating—the ones that weren’t about separation, but about what we share. When I was thirteen or fourteen years old, I came across a book by Giorgio Vasari for the first time—he is often referred to today as the «father of art history»; above all, however, he was both a painter and an architect. In his life, there was room for both. When we build pavilions in the Serpentine Gallery’s park to exhibit works of art, architecture and the visual arts are inseparable; rather, they interact with one another. Yona Friedman, in turn, taught me how to question the top-down culture of curating. And the great Swiss economist Binswanger, my university professor at the University of St. Gallen (HSG), showed me early on that if you completely rule out economic considerations, you’ll soon reach the limits of growth. After all, someone has to pay for art, which is why it’s important to stay in dialogue with relevant stakeholders. So many different influences have come together to shape me—how could I not be an advocate for synthesis? It’s not as if I’m the only one who believes in the importance of interdisciplinarity; You can see this in countless examples: Natalya Goncharova designed the set, Stravinsky composed the music, and Coco Chanel contributed ideas for the costumes—there have been moments like these time and again throughout history.

And we probably need it now, too—on a global scale and not limited to art?!

As I said: We can only tackle big questions like climate change if we step outside our intellectual silos and overcome our fear of what comes next. We must bridge this apparent divide between the arts and humanities on the one hand, and the natural sciences on the other. And, so to speak, create a «third culture» that brings them back together. Worldwide. Opponents of intellectual globalization advocate nationalism and a focus on the local, but that’s no progress! Only a global dialogue can make a difference—one in which, for example through art, we weigh different positions against one another, listen to differences, and decide together which direction to take.

Let's say there was someone standing in front of you who had never read a book, never listened to a piece of music, and never seen a work of art. What would be the first thing you would show this person in each case?

First of all: It’s going to be hard for me to narrow it down. When it comes to art, that’s practically impossible for me. As for literature—well—I buy a book every day and have a collection of about 70,000 titles (laughs). First, I would give that person the book about my conversations with Édouard Glissant—it was published in a «Pocket Book» collection, so you can take it with you anywhere. Glissant is not only the founder of Creole philosophy, but I’m convinced that he provides us with the most important philosophical toolkit we could possibly use. Our conversations are, in a sense, an introduction to his thinking, to his theories. Then I would definitely also recommend the writings of Etel Adnan, who has already been mentioned several times today; because she transforms poetry and visual art into talismans of love and hope. Or perhaps I should start with Giorgio Vasari’s treatise, which had such a profound impact on me in my youth? In it, he shows that even someone like Michelangelo is a child of his time—and that today, too, we are experiencing artists «live» who will fascinate future generations. As for music… I think I’d choose a piece by Hildegard von Bingen; definitely. To me, she’s one of the most important figures in contemporary history. She was a healer, a writer, a composer, a public intellectual—an incredible woman.

That would be a nice closing remark …

… wait, I just thought of something else! (laughs) You asked me earlier what kinds of examples there are of the impact that artists and cultural figures have when they collaborate with companies or governments. This brings to mind cultural attachés: the Polish poet and Nobel Prize winner in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz, served as his country’s cultural attaché in New York and Paris. Octavio Paz, the Mexican writer and diplomat, was a cultural attaché in the Netherlands. Or let’s take a Swiss example: The art collector and former Swiss ambassador Uli Sigg, during his tenure in China in the late 1990s, turned the embassy in Beijing into a place of artistic exchange—it’s hard to even imagine! I was with him at the time and visited him; I even stayed there. Not only did the «who’s who» of the Chinese art scene and intellectuals come and go, but new, important partnerships between countries were also forged there. When you look at an example like that—as a Swiss person abroad—you can’t help but wonder: Why aren’t we bringing more artists and cultural figures back into our embassies? After all, there are plenty of embassies around the world. What are we waiting for? It’s kind of… urgent.

Hans Ulrich Obrist is the artistic director of the Serpentine Galleries in London. Previously, he was a curator at the Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris. Since his first exhibition, «World Soup (The Kitchen Show),» in 1991, he has curated more than 300 exhibitions, authored numerous books, and delivered keynote speeches and lectures around the world. He writes for various art and cultural magazines and, according to Artnet, is one of the «fifty most important people in the global art world.».

m&k: Javier Varela, in November, Volvo Cars unveiled the new flagship of its electric fleet: the EX90 SUV. Three words in particular stuck with me after the car’s presentation: sustainability, safety, and personalized luxury. Would you say those are the concepts that define your brand today?

Javier Varela: First, let me recap Volvo’s purpose: Our goal is to give people the freedom to move in a way that is safe, sustainable, and tailored to their individual needs. Your question already touches on these aspects. So let’s go through them in detail, shall we?

Gladly.

These days, it probably comes as no surprise to anyone when I say that the future of automotive transportation is entirely electric. At Volvo Cars, we’ve been convinced of this for quite some time. Even during—and despite—the pandemic, we’ve seen that sales and market penetration of electric vehicles have increased dramatically. This aligns with a decision we made at Volvo Cars a few years ago—one that was still relatively bold at the time: the decision that by 2030, we will build and offer only fully electric vehicles. We’ve taken various steps to put this decision into action, and the unveiling of the EX90 is another such step. But, you know—it’s not just the electric powertrain that makes the vehicle unique. The EX90 is essentially a «computer on wheels» …

… which improves both safety and comfort …

Yes. Because the EX90 was designed around a central computer, it can be considered a so-called «software-defined vehicle.» This means we can continue to improve and update the car long after customers have picked it up from the dealership. This keeps the customer experience always «fresh» and full of surprises. This not only enhances the overall experience and increases driving pleasure, but also ensures that we can immediately implement new technological advancements—for example, in terms of safety—remotely. EX90 owners benefit enormously from this.

That reminds me a little of a smartphone that you can update with a new operating system every few months …

A very apt comparison. And because people have fully embraced smart mobile technology—because they’re already used to many of their devices working intuitively and «smoothly»—they increasingly expect to have access to equivalent experiences in other areas of their lives as well. No one walks around with a pager anymore; the paradigm shift we’ve experienced over the past decade is truly incredible! I’m certain we’ll see something similar when it comes to cars. And I can say this: We’re ready.

You mentioned that Volvo Cars« decision to transition entirely to the production of electric cars by 2030 was considered »bold” just a few years ago. Do you remember how that decision came about?

Well, it all started with some in-depth reflection on our purpose. Back then, we asked ourselves: «Why do we actually exist? Why are we in business? Why do we develop new products, and what impact should they have on the world?» We have always placed the utmost importance on safety—from the founding of Volvo Cars in 1927 to the present day, nearly a century later. But as we thought about how we could recalibrate our purpose for the future, we quickly came to the conclusion that we also needed to focus on sustainability. We had placed the emphasis on protecting the people who drive our cars—but was that enough? Shouldn’t we also do everything in our power to protect our planet? We answered that question with a resounding «Yes!»—and then it became perfectly clear that we must vigorously drive forward electrification. After all, when it comes to cars, there’s simply no better way to reduce CO2 emissions—and thereby slow global warming and, ultimately, protect nature—than to opt for an electric powertrain.

For a company as large as Volvo Cars—which currently employs around 40,000 people worldwide—deciding to undertake such a comprehensive transformation is one thing. But getting the entire workforce «on board»—that’s …

… an even bigger challenge, yes (laughs). But our people are truly fantastic! And of course, I’m not just referring to the leadership team, which has always provided very clear direction. No, I’m talking about all of our employees—regardless of which department, role, or plant they work in. Their willingness to embrace change is what made the implementation of our plans possible in the first place. There are always a few hurdles to overcome, and you have to do a lot of explaining, but I think that’s perfectly fine. You see, we had groups of engineers in the company who had spent a large part of their careers working solely on improving internal combustion engines. And then to tell these people, «Hey, we’re stopping building these kinds of engines—but we have a new challenge for you!» … that can be difficult, sometimes even really tricky. But—even if it might sound like a marketing cliché (laughs)—Volvo can move mountains. And I think we’ve proven that in the process of transforming the company.

To be honest, I'm not particularly tech-savvy, nor am I a car expert. But could you still give me an idea of which features of your new vehicle were particularly complicated to develop?

There are several components that we had to spend quite a while mulling over. I’ve already mentioned how important safety is to Volvo—that’s why we developed a sensor-based «safety shield» around the EX90. We wanted the vehicle to be able to detect movements or objects in its vicinity far better than the human eye, regardless of weather or lighting conditions. With this in mind, we’ve also made «Lidar» standard equipment—a radar system that’s mounted on top of the car, directly above the windshield, similar to where human eyes are positioned on the head. You may be driving in pitch darkness, or fog or heavy rain may be obstructing your view, but Lidar knows about 250 meters in advance if you’re heading toward an obstacle. That’s an enormous distance, and it’s no small feat to implement that in technology. There’s a lot involved here: reconciling the raw data received from sensors throughout the vehicle and from the lidar at a central interface; analyzing this data to understand what kind of obstacle you’re approaching… and then making the «decision» to help the driver apply the brakes if necessary… all of this, «on its own,» is a masterpiece of our engineers« work. But when combined, it’s truly unique. And then, of course, there’s the battery life: You can travel over six hundred kilometers on a single charge!

They have also succeeded in developing new systems that «know» whether the driver is tired—or has forgotten a child or a pet when getting out of the car.

Yes, we’re aware of what’s happening inside the vehicle… and we’ve focused on two main areas: The EX90 is equipped with cameras and sensors that allow us to determine whether the person behind the wheel is experiencing a medical emergency, is tired, or is distracted. In the worst-case scenario—for example, if a driver loses consciousness—the EX90 will steer itself completely autonomously to the side of the road and come to a stop there. We’re also able to detect if someone is leaving the car in a hurry and leaving their dog or baby behind. The person then receives a notification and can return to the vehicle.

Now that we’ve almost reached the end of our conversation, let’s get a little «philosophical»: In the future, cars will be an important—but not the only—component of sustainable transportation. What role will they play—and how will they interact with other modes of transportation?

You mentioned earlier that you're not really a car expert, but I suppose you could call me one! (laughs) I’ve actually been working in this industry for quite some time now… for more than thirty years, to be exact. Of course, the industry I started out in no longer exists in that form; everything has changed. That’s why I regularly reflect on questions like the one you just asked me. The software-defined vehicle is, by its very nature, a highly connected vehicle. It is «connected» to its occupants and the surrounding environment—to the person behind the wheel, the passengers, and the route—but also to other vehicles, modes of transportation, and technologies. Now that we’re seeing widespread implementation of 5G mobile networks in many countries, the latter will become even more significant. This will enable very fast data exchange between the car and public infrastructure or mobility hubs. When it comes to how we’ll get around in the future, we’re on the verge of a real revolution.

Can you give me an example of that?

Yes, of course. Imagine you’re approaching a long traffic jam—and your car, thanks to its computing power and comprehensive connectivity, is able not only to know that the road ahead is blocked, but also how best to handle the situation. Is there another route—a way to bypass the traffic jam? Or is there a train station nearby that you can easily reach—where you’ll find available parking—and where a train to your destination departs in just a few minutes, so you could switch from the road to the rails for the rest of your trip? That may still sound like a pipe dream or a bit like science fiction. But as I said: We’ve prepared for such developments, and they’re becoming a reality—probably much faster than some people realize today.

Lapis philosophorum - the "philosopher's stone" - does not (contrary to what a popular youth book suggests) "merely" describe a mineral substance that grants its owner healing and thus eternal life. The term refers above all to the goal of transmutation, which was researched in alchemy for several centuries but never achieved: a base material is turned into a precious metal through a special process - rubble becomes gold.

Certainly, the time of the alchemists is long gone, and the gold of the present is "clean" energy, which, as we know, cannot be generated from coal-fired power plants (because of emissions), nuclear power plants (because of fuel rod storage) or Russian pipelines (for a variety of reasons). So what to do? Well, it seems that a German-American entrepreneur has found the modern "philosopher's stone" - and that Europe is finally starting to take it seriously.

Waste becomes hydrogen

Charlie Thannhäuser is not an alchemist, of course, nor are there any miracles or magic behind his company "Concord Blue". In more than two decades of research and with an enormous investment of personal resources, Thannhäuser and his team have succeeded in developing a technology that can be used to recycle almost any type of waste into "green" hydrogen. The only thing that remains, apart from the element chemically described as "H2", is a few grams of fine, non-toxic ash.

The hydrogen produced can be used directly to power vehicles, for example, or indirectly to generate electricity in corresponding power plants. The defence and technology group Lockheed Martin in the USA recognized the potential of the method back in 2016, and several "Concord Blue" power plants are also connected to the grid in Japan. Only in Europe, which is constrained by a corset of regulations (and has long been "spoiled" by cheap gas), did hardly anyone seem to be interested. Until now.

All of a sudden, even the biggest bureaucrats and most cautious investors are realizing that if the "Concord Blue" method succeeds, several global problems would be solved in one fell swoop. Two questions are therefore being asked more and more frequently: Doesn't it all sound too good to be true? And: Who is the entrepreneur who has been working on (his) revolution for more than two decades?

Vision, capital and perseverance

First of all, let's talk about Charlie Thannhäuser, who spoke to m&k via Zoom. He is the exact opposite of an "absent-minded professor", both visually and in his mannerisms. His skin is tanned by the Californian sun - the company's headquarters are now located in Los Angeles - and English words are repeatedly mixed into the entrepreneur's otherwise accent-free High German. The journalist's subjective impression: Thannhäuser does not look like someone who travels the world almost non-stop and breathlessly to give keynotes, lobby interests or initiate partnerships. Nevertheless, that is precisely his life, as he reports.

But he doesn't have to do all this because he has already made a career for himself. As a programmer with his own company, whose core business he sold at the height of the digital boom. He could actually drive up and down Wilshire Boulevard, the central axis connecting Santa Monica and Beverly Hills, in a convertible until the end of his days, perhaps interrupted by the occasional round of golf or tennis. Instead, he has decided to use Wilshire Boulevard simply to get to the office. Life as a private citizen, says Thannhäuser, was never an option; he invested a large part of what he earned back then from the sale of his core business in his hydrogen vision.

From entrepreneur to missionary?

"But I want to be completely honest," says the entrepreneur: "When I founded Concord Blue twenty years ago, it wasn't out of pure benevolence. I knew that oil and gas are finite resources and I wanted to earn money as a logical consequence of this fact." At the time, he was still operating out of the tranquil German town of Herten, but he underestimated two things: the industry's unwillingness at the time to face up to the facts when it came to finite resources - and the slowing power of German bureaucracy. "Nobody was talking about 'renewable energies' in 2002, they were only ever talking about 'alternative energies'," recalls Charlie Thannhäuser. And why were 'alternatives' needed when cheaper energy sources seemed to be available in abundance? Germany's planned nuclear phase-out was a long way off, coal emissions only really seemed to matter to eco-activists - and nobody could anticipate the energy war with Russia. So the "Concord Blue" team was fighting a pretty lonely battle.

Nevertheless, a test reactor for the "waste-to-hydrogen method" was to be connected to the grid in Herten in order to demonstrate the advantages of the technology to decision-makers practically during operation. The paradox, however: "After three years, we would have had to deconstruct the site again, because pilot projects in this area were only allowed to be set up for a certain period of time at the time." So "Concord Blue" applied for a permit for permanent operation of the plant, but would have had to accept that the relevant authorities would place the technology on a regulatory level with that of combustion power plants. The founder then decided to change location: "Our way of producing hydrogen is defined precisely by not working with combustion," he says - and adds with a grin: "At some point, that was simply too anti-innovation for me." At the same time, a kind of mental transformation took place for him: What was originally supposed to be primarily a clever business idea became a mission. And giving up was no longer an option.

Tour around the world - with success

In Japan, India and the USA, people were much more open to the sustainable production of hydrogen, and so Charlie Thannhäuser set up sites in Izumo, Mumbai and Owego. Each time he proved his point: The water vapor thermolysis, which he had patented, works excellently. The details of the process are not easy for laypeople to understand, but the expert community and relevant specialist media agree: what has been developed here is a stroke of genius (for more details, see the QR code in the separate info box).

It is also important to emphasize something else at this point: "Concord Blue" has received German TÜV certification for its technology in 2022 and has thus overcome one of the most important hurdles for its "return" to Germany, to Europe. According to Charlie Thannhäuser, several locations where he wants to turn waste into hydrogen in Germany and the Netherlands have already been identified. And, as he is not the only one to reveal, the official news is that Concord Blue has already secured several hundred million US dollars in investment. In order to acquire the remaining amount, the entrepreneur is in talks with potential investors. "I'm convinced," he says, "that we'll soon be at a point where things can move very quickly."

A grand vision

And then it will happen, the vision of the global roll-out of the "Concord Blue" technology. As difficult as the process was to develop, the infrastructure used for it is robust, explains the founder. Whether somewhere on the African continent, in South American mega-cities or in the German provinces, the technology can be scaled up without any problems. "Large cities can solve their waste and energy problems in this way, but rural villages in developing countries can not only finally have a power supply, they can also be completely self-sufficient," says Thannhäuser. Twenty years of work would then have been more than worth it: the "impact" would shape the world for centuries to come.

Charlie Thannhäuser is a German-American entrepreneur. As CEO and founder of the company "Concord Blue", he and his team have developed a process that can convert almost any type of waste into "green" hydrogen via steam thermolysis. Further information on Concordblue.com.

Print brings things to life. That’s Kasimir Meyer AG’s tagline. And during my visit to Wohlen, AG, I can already sense that enthusiasm as soon as I walk in. Print is on the walls, on the shelves, and on the table in the conference room, where Beni Kiser is waiting for me. The scent strikes me as unusual—I breathe in the fragrance of flowers. Kiser laughs and points to a package on the shelf, letting me know that I can definitely trust my nose. In 2021, Kasimir Meyer won the Swiss Print Award in the «printed objects» category with Pure Soap. An organic soap was elegantly packaged and has been spreading this irresistible scent ever since.

For the past ten years, Beni Kiser has been responsible for the company and its 30 full-time employees, including five apprentices. In 2021, he handed over management to Simone Iannantuoni. «Our goal is not merely to be a supplier to our customers, but to be a knowledgeable partner who understands their individual needs and translates them into high-quality solutions,» says Iannantuoni, and Kiser adds: «We are a full-service provider, a reliable partner that, thanks to our innovative strength, continuous quality management, and high level of commitment, stands for high process reliability and short delivery times, while also making targeted use of all available synergies.»

«We are service providers»

Print has been declared dead so many times. Kiser observes the opposite. Young people are “digitally fatigued,” he says; they are returning to books more and more, deriving greater pleasure from the tactile experience than from staring at screens. Of course, both men realize that Gen Z is living in a state of digital overload, but that is precisely why a return to a slower pace and to high-quality, well-crafted products is on the rise again. They back up this theory with a study from the University of Stuttgart. 220 young students were asked about their media consumption preferences.

Kasimir Meyer AG therefore sees itself not just as a printing company, but as a service provider. Beni Kiser emphasizes that he is not a salesperson, but rather a service provider. He learned his trade from the ground up at a small printing shop in Obwalden, where he also grew up. In his fourth year of apprenticeship as an offset printer, his boss told him that, given how creative and curious he was, he should put out feelers and leave the company after completing his apprenticeship. «I’m still grateful to my mentor for having that foresight. He could have kept me on, but he saw that I had the drive to achieve more.»

Actionable Visions

After a few detours, he ended up at Kasimir Meyer AG in Wohlen, where he found a great team. «I knew that with this team, we could make a difference and take risks.» That’s how Kasimir Meyer AG began investing heavily in digital printing. «The most expensive technology was the best,» he grins. Everyone was speechless at the time. «That’s when the madman in me came out,» laughs Beni Kiser.

Today, Kasimir Meyer AG can say of itself: «We are not only a traditional offset printing company with high standards, but also a leader in digital printing and finishing.» And it is precisely in these areas that the company aims to continue to impress in the future. «We’ve already got another surprise planned for the coming year in the area of finishing,» hints Simone Iannantuoni. «Today, you have to have a good relationship with the customer, come up with innovative ideas, surprise them with solutions, serve them well, advise them as an equal, and help them find the best solution,» adds Beni Kiser, elaborating on the company’s vision.

This is how you keep customers loyal

The entire team at Kasimir Meyer AG sees Beni Kiser as a problem-solver. And since Simone Iannantuoni has been running the company, he’s had more time for that himself.

Kasimir Meyer does not see itself as competition for creative agencies; the company views itself as a supporter of its clients. Iannantuoni and Kiser agree: «It’s only thanks to our great team that we can consistently deliver high-quality work.»

A Victory for Decency?

But with his over-the-top, rousing campaign speech, Barack Obama brings the underdog back into the race. In the end, Fetterman wins by about 200,000 votes over his Republican opponent, TV doctor Mehmet Oz. Shortly afterward, it is announced that former astronaut Mark Kelly has successfully defended his Democratic Senate seat—and that his colleague Catherine Cortez Masto in Nevada was narrowly re-elected. The upper house of the U.S. Congress thus remains, by a narrow margin, in the hands of President Joe Biden’s party.

Have decency and justice also prevailed, as so many commentators tried to make us believe after these midterms? On the contrary. Around the world, hatred in public debates will grow, the intensity will increase, and everyone and everything—including the economy (!)—will become even more polarized. A new culture of incivility is shaping our political—and increasingly our economic—actions worldwide. It is a battle of extremes: evil versus good, hatred versus experience, arrogance versus reason, moral hubris versus fact-based wisdom.

Anyone who argues with reason finds themselves caught between the extremes of the left and the right, hearing the cry of «Letzte Generation» that crushes every objective argument: «The end is near. We’re all going to die.» In such a situation, the end often justifies the means. Citizens and others wonder: Who holds the compass that points the way? The Ship of Fools is adrift on the high seas. Its course is unknown. Full steam ahead.

Diversity? «Not everywhere, please!»

While in Cologne the muezzin calls out to the cathedral city from the gigantic central mosque, the protocol department of the German Foreign Minister has the cross of Jesus removed from the meeting room of Münster City Hall for a G7 meeting. And the question remains as to which of those present might have been offended by the symbol of Christ (those in attendance were representatives from Italy, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, the U.S., Japan, and, of course, Germany). Annalena Baerbock can still claim that she herself was not involved. Her staff at the ministry don’t understand the fuss: after all, they also removed one of the carpets lying there. Whether carpet or cross of Christ, for the Foreign Office in this case it’s just «decoration.» Don’t get me wrong: Whether secular or clerical, whether Christianity or Islam—that’s only a side issue here. This is about a world that, under the spell of polarization, has lost its moral compass. Equal rights for all? Not on the deck of the Ship of Fools, on its journey across the black sea.

Values? «Only if it doesn’t cost anything!»

Germany’s foreign minister aims to put a stop to the rogue elements in China with a «values-based foreign policy.» Meanwhile, in Stuttgart, the city’s Green Party Minister-President, Winfried Kretschmann, hopes things won’t get that bad—after all, the «Daimler» Group, headquartered in the state capital, sells one out of every three cars in China—especially those priced at 150,000 euros and up. With the office comes the realization: Balance sheets, too, are value-based; and values, too, are balance-sheet-based.

Everyone who launches LGBTQI+ campaigns for their company or publicly expresses on LinkedIn how progressive their employer is must also be aware of this. If companies don’t do in Kampala, Beijing, or Qatar what they do in Geneva, Milan, or Madrid—for example, hanging «Pride» flags in front of their corporate headquarters—then it’s fair to ask how seriously such a measure can be taken. Or whether such a measure is merely window dressing—a convenient and inexpensive gesture in places where no one is going to protest anyway. Balance sheets are based on values; values are based on balance sheets.

The Waltz of the Last Generation

At the same time, the «last generation» is dancing its final waltz. But four decades after Scorsese’s masterpiece *The Last Waltz*, there is no fitting soundtrack, no Woodstock, and no Altamont; no Tracy Chapman speaks or sings of a revolution anymore; instead, Taylor Swift dominates the top ten of the U.S. charts with ten songs from a mediocre album.

This activist movement has no musicians to credibly champion its cause, nor any intellectuals who elevate it—as Horkheimer, Adorno, or Marcuse did for the «68ers. Instead, Greta and Luisa are the »influencers.« And so is a portion of the journalistic information elite, now plagued—like any member of the middle class—by fears of social decline and the urge to distinguish themselves from the »nameless opinion-makers of all kinds” through distinctive attributes.

«I’m a woman, a mother, I have strong opinions—and I wear my hair in a bun when I’m in the public eye.» That’s how a very talented, experienced, and eloquent journalist once described herself to me. And I realized: Intelligence alone isn’t enough anymore. How about a little bun? It’s a must! For better recognition on TV talk shows: «Ah, there’s that woman with the bun again» … Opinions and arguments aren’t enough anymore. It has to be extremes—or at least «little extremes»—to stick in the audience’s auditory or visual perception.

Just saying «no» isn’t enough

Of course, simply being «against» what the supposed majority of colleagues thinks is not, in and of itself, a valid argument. This becomes clear time and again when observing opinion leaders like the once thoroughly competent Roger Köppel (full transparency, first of all: he’s a former colleague of mine from Springer). In the thicket of German populism, he has built himself a new, cozy nest, and angry readers bring him fresh twigs every day—so that it may grow vigorously. Why agitate just eight million people when you can incite over eighty million? Eric Gujer must be thinking along similar lines when, writing for the Berlin edition of the NZZ, he ponders what is «no longer allowed to be said» in German discourse. It’s easy to write this with an eye on Bellevue and Opernplatz, but is Gujer aware of the potential consequences of his words? Left-wing populism—see the beginning of the text—will not save us; nor, for that matter, will right-wing populism. Hard to port, hard to starboard… and riding the waves until the sails break?!

A Climate of Hate

Well: When sails break, ships capsize. When ships capsize, people die. In Berlin, climate activists are blocking the street. An emergency response vehicle, on its way to free a cyclist trapped under a truck, cannot get through the resulting traffic jam. Seriously injured, the cyclist is finally taken to the hospital, where she later dies. «Shit happens,» tweets Tadzio Müller, co-founder of the new climate movement. Later, he apologizes and, at the same time—in true old-school activist fashion—uses the uproar to turn the media narrative on its head: Lobbyists, right-wing journalists, and their ilk are to blame for these excesses; they are the ones who created the climate of opinion (!) in which such hatred first took root.

Müller doesn’t say what this has to do with the failure to render aid caused by climate protesters. He doesn’t care either. And for that, he reaps hatred in return—hatred that clouds our view of what was once at the heart of the school strikes led by a Swedish girl who has been turned into an icon: awareness of a massive environmental problem that must be seriously discussed. This issue is too important to be held hostage by populists on both sides.

Radical Anti-Radicalism

What meaning can we distill from this mélange of observations? The biochemist and essayist Erwin Chargaff, who died twenty years ago in a New York apartment overflowing with notes and books, wrote in his collection *Serious Questions*: «You can always start somewhere—anywhere you like—and continue along the most convoluted paths; (…). The ultimate cause seems not to exist at all, and yet you know: there must be one.»

I took his words as my guide; I started somewhere—and now I’ll conclude with a thesis that is meant to evoke not the «last generation» but Chargaff’s «last cause»: The world has probably never been as complex and fragmented as it is today. Probably never before have so many radicalized interest groups stood in such irreconcilable opposition to one another. Yes, it’s all terribly complicated—and yes, even I get headaches from it sometimes. But we can’t endure much longer a further radicalization; a further drifting apart of the tectonic plates to the left and right of the political center. We must learn once again to speak with—rather than over or against—one another. We may, should, and want to argue. But without hatred, without opportunism, without contempt. Because, let’s not forget: there are people on the «other side,» too.

A discursive «climate goal»

Sometimes I (full transparency—this is the second time) take part in the talk show «Viertel nach Acht,» brilliantly hosted by Nena Brockhaus and produced by BildTV in Berlin. Viewership numbers are steadily rising, despite the doomsday predictions directed at Axel Springer. After all, in this format, arguments clash without the participants being driven by personal vanity or vested interests. It’s all about identifying the best idea—and nothing more. Perhaps this is an approach that will help us move forward in society and the economy: that we now take a step back, catch our breath—and then cool the emotional heat with rational sobriety. A «climate goal» that perhaps even the «last generation» might eventually come to terms with. That would be what we all hope for.

m&k: Markus Gabriel, would you describe yourself as a «public intellectual»?

Markus Gabriel: Of course, that’s a rather vague term. If you’re referring to a position held by highly respected figures such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, or Jürgen Habermas—then it would be an honorary title. Or if you’re thinking of Thomas Aquinas, Plato, Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, or Hannah Arendt. The concept of the «public intellectual» raises the question of whether, as a philosopher, one wishes to contribute to the rationality of the public sphere. And I certainly have that aspiration—but precisely as a philosopher!

With that, you’ve already hinted at why I asked the question in the first place. In my opinion, you occupy an interesting, almost unique «middle ground» in contemporary social discourse: You address the problems of our time and give interviews to popular media outlets, but at the same time you repeatedly express skepticism or derision toward «talk-show philosophers» like Richard David Precht or Yuval Noah Harari. Does it simply bother you that they put forward these ideas—or is it also the impression these figures convey about philosophy?

Plato distinguishes between true philosophers and those who may look and act like philosophers but use arguments not in the service of truth and knowledge, but rather to further their own interests; perhaps they even put forward a weak thesis here and there. These are the Sophists. But here’s the thing: what Precht and Harari offer isn’t even enough to qualify as sophistry. They say practically nothing—there are virtually no theories, no guiding ideas they stand for, and certainly no philosophical justification. This is even less true of Precht than of Harari. Harari at least has one central thesis, namely that social cohesion is generated only once a group reaches a certain size through storytelling… Yet this is not only empirically refutable—since individuals do this as well—but also, for starters, trivial. One cannot really derive his grand history of humanity from this. With Precht, on the other hand, to my knowledge we find no clear thesis and certainly no philosophical arguments. Neither of them operates in the field of philosophy. The fact is, however, that because Markus Lanz’s show lists «Richard David Precht, philosopher» in the subtitle, the public believes that someone like him is a philosopher. And that is indeed detrimental to rational discourse. Such figures jeopardize the public reputation of philosophy—they are to our discipline what populism is to politics.

However, as the complex challenges of the present day grow, so does the desire for simple answers. Haven’t you ever been tempted to become a «philosophical populist» and … «cash in»?

No, that’s not what I want. As a philosopher, there is a fundamental ethical obligation that I would never want to renounce, unless I were in dire straits. And that obligation states: «Truth and clarity come first in philosophy.» If you can also make money doing that, wonderful; I’m not at all against the commercial world or against anyone selling millions of books. Many genuine philosophers, such as Harry Frankfurt, also sell books successfully. For me, the clear line would be crossed if—in order to do that—I had to say things that no longer take the form of a theory. If I were to have something like an immortal soul (laughs), it would be harmed by «pseudo-philosophical populism»; and that is a price I am not willing to pay.

With the exception of Jürgen Habermas, the examples of «public intellectuals» you mentioned at the beginning all belong to a more distant past. Is there also a modern ideal that serves as a guide for you?

The title of her latest book, *Man as Animal: Why We Still Don’t Fit into Nature*, doesn’t necessarily sound like an analysis of today’s crises; at first glance, it contains no reference to war, climate change, or social decline. Nevertheless, the book is intended as a response to precisely those crises. In what way?

It is a widely held convention—even within the environmental movement and in all political parties where this plays a role—to view humans as «animals plus X.» You can substitute «X» with reason, morality, language, culture, money, the economy, the ability to form political organizations, the capacity for social behavior… whatever you like. So humans are supposed to be animals—like primates, insects, and big cats—but with «something extra.» Conversely, this means that an animal is a «human minus X.» We define animals through a process of dehumanization. If you think this through consistently, it is, of course, something that unfortunately comes back to haunt us. After all, we’ve already established that, from this perspective, there’s a large overlap between us and animals. Everything about and within us humans that doesn’t fall into the «plus» category consequently becomes an animalistic, dark force: Something that behavioral economics must investigate; something that manifests as irrational impulsivity on the psychoanalyst’s couch; something that politicians stoke and manipulate with demagogic speeches. A shadow reign of the amygdala, in which “the animal within us” pulls the actual strings. All these assumptions contain a series of terrible errors that ultimately lead us to the mess we find ourselves in today.

Let's start by talking about the «mistakes»—and then about how they relate to the crises of our time.

Describing humans as «animals plus X» is, from a scientific standpoint, utter nonsense. The totality of living beings we call «animals» today is enormously diverse in and of itself—no animal is an «animal» in the sense of the sweeping collective term that has become established. Bees are not beavers, and beavers are not bison. With the «animal plus X» argument, we distinguish ourselves from an undefined «mass of animals» that does not exist at all. I would like to emphasize this: Outside the terminology used by us humans, animals «in and of themselves» do not exist at all; as just indicated, there are only living beings with very different characteristics. The false generalization upon which the erroneous distinction «human equals animal plus X» is based reveals, in two respects, an enormously problematic human need for control: On the one hand, we want to subject what we perceive around us to our simple categories; on the other hand, we want to suppress and control the effects of this categorization—for example, the “animalistic forces within us” that we suspect exist. Fundamentally, the conventions of our self-image are a kind of collective hallucination, which I challenge in my book and for which I call for an alternative. For such an alternative would be the way out of the multiple crises of the present.

Given the premise «simplex sigillum veri,» what alternative do you propose?

Let’s leave behind what we’ve done so far: Let’s throw overboard the sweeping concept of «animal,» which is based on dehumanization. And let’s throw the view of humanity that conceives of us as «animal plus X» right after it. Then we’ll learn to see ourselves as «sentient beings» surrounded by other, «non-sentient beings.» As «spiritual beings,» we can happily call ourselves—and only ourselves!—«animals,» or «humans,» or whatever we like. What seems more important to me in this process than quibbling over words is that we learn to bear a special responsibility for “non-spiritual beings” in all their complexity and biodiversity—precisely because we differ from them quite radically.

At first glance, it seems paradoxical: Charles Darwin’s theories gained popularity just as the Industrial Revolution was gaining momentum. Thanks to Darwin, humans saw themselves more than ever as «animals plus X,» yet at the same time they destroyed flora and fauna as they saw fit. Non-industrialized forest peoples, on the other hand, still see themselves today as «guardians of nature,» with which they live in harmony. What does all this mean?

It doesn’t make sense; that’s the tragic part. I’m currently collaborating on a project that studies the Kogi indigenous people, a community of about 16,000 people who live in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta in Colombia. When I speak with Kogi representatives—and I’ve had the opportunity to do so several times now—we talk about metaphysics, philosophy, and cosmology. This is a highly advanced culture that, while lacking modern technology, possesses the most sophisticated intellectual and ecological insights. We don’t need to retreat to forest huts or smash our cell phones to see this: The Kogi view themselves as spiritual beings who, as it were, bear responsibility for the living beings around them. They live from and with the forest—and, if we include their ancestors, have done so for millennia. Our industrialized way of life has existed for just over two centuries, and it is on the verge of collapse. We are threatened by self-destruction. Under no circumstances will we survive as long as the Kogi unless we return to the principles that guide them.

If we were to heed your call to correct our self-perception, this would have a wide range of implications. It would mean, for example, that we could no longer attribute our cruelty, destructive rage, or impulsiveness to a «temporary suspension of our non-animal qualities»—we could not apologetically claim that, here and there, we may have acted «irrationally» or «primitive» here and there, but «somehow couldn’t have acted any other way.» Instead, we would have to face up to our guilt when we have acted wrongly. Let’s take a current example: Someone like Vladimir Putin could then no longer be explained—or even «exonerated»—by the attribute of «irrationality» …

Exactly. The debate over whether Putin should be described as an «irrational actor» was misguided from the start. Let’s not forget Goethe: «(…) he calls it reason and uses it solely to be more bestial than any beast»—so it says in the prologue to *Faust*. Putin is rational. He is a sentient being, just like all of us. He is simply evil. That is what we must understand. His own brand of reason is not the sober, economic rationality we tend to associate with the term, which is why he has not lost that kind of reason. He acts in accordance with his own logic of evil. This is not the war of a «mad aggressor»; what is happening in Ukraine cannot be reduced to the impulsiveness of an old, white man. Nor does it have anything to do with testosterone or vodka. No, abstract evil finds a concrete incarnation in Vladimir Putin. And that is the key to understanding this terrible, dangerous despot.

In his arguments, Putin—like Xi Jinping in China, for example—likes to use ideas that are part of value relativism. Why is this philosophical movement so popular among populists, and what makes it so dangerous?

Value relativism is the idea that moral judgments—that is, judgments about what we should do with regard to the fundamental questions of our existence; what is «right and wrong»—always depend on the group or culture to which we belong. Consequently, there would be a different moral code for Switzerland or Norway; for China or Russia. One could also distinguish between classes within a single culture: one moral code for the working class, another for the economic elite, and so on. The Putins, Trumps, Orbáns, and Xis of this world naturally love this, of course, because it allows them to shield their own actions from criticism. And to claim, for example, that while autocracy may no longer be comprehensible to «the West,» democracy is no more a universal value, and people should simply leave them alone.

Oppression, warmongering, and fascism are redefined as expressions of cultural identity …

Yes. And what’s particularly insidious about this is that value relativism can actually be refuted quite easily—because anyone who tries to argue from that perspective isn’t even talking about anything that deserves to be called «values» anymore! Morality, as a system of values, must claim universality; it must apply to all people at all times. This means it must be considered separately from group dynamics and sociological snapshots. If it is acceptable for Russia today to fire Iskander missiles at kindergartens, then that is not an expression of «Russian values» that are in conflict with «Western values.» It is malicious, abhorrent, and cannot be justified by anything. One does not kill innocent children—this is a so-called «moral truism,» the disregard of which undermines the very foundation of our civilization.

If we assume that there are «moral self-evident truths»—such as the protection of life or the guarantee of equality for all members of society—must we then enforce these «self-evident truths» by force? Or is that a contradiction in terms?

We can only export awareness of «moral self-evident truths» and the commitment to them to a limited extent. But we can—and must—defend them where they have already been implemented or where they are just beginning to take root. That is why NATO is a defensive alliance—and that is right. That is why Ukraine has a right to defend itself—and that is right. And that is why so many nations feel a sense of solidarity with Ukraine. What specific actions should be taken is a question I leave to the military strategists; that is no longer the realm of philosophy. Incidentally, this reminds me once again why philosophical populists are dangerous: because they classify such questions—such as arms deliveries or the correct diplomatic course—as belonging to the realm of philosophy. What Precht says about Ukraine and Russia has nothing to do with philosophy and does not correspond to NATO’s current understanding of military strategy.

In 2021, you published the book *Moral Progress in Dark Times*. Do you still believe that we are collectively capable of such progress?

Absolutely. In addition to the terrible step backward that is a war of aggression—with all its malicious ramifications and human rights violations—we continue to see a public that is interested in moral clarity on the fundamental issues of our time. That is why the energy issue is not just about Putin, but also about morally sounder supply chains and the inevitable ecological transformation of our societies—this is moral progress, even if some debates are conducted in an overly irrational and aggressive manner.

War, the climate crisis, our severely distorted self-perception—and yet, despite all this, philosopher Markus Gabriel looks to the future with hope?

Yes, because I believe we are currently witnessing the birth of a new order. A birth is always accompanied by labor pains, which can sometimes—unfortunately—be excruciating. It remains to be seen how much more we will have to endure on the path to this new order. Even German Chancellor Olaf Scholz—who, in my view, is an intellectual and not a Merkel imitation, as some believe—has recognized this: the «turning point» is coming. He may have meant considerably less by the term than he actually implied, but—the fault lines are already becoming visible. We must move toward something that is only just beginning to manifest itself, taking small, pragmatic steps. And we must carefully weigh every step.

Immanuel Kant also believed in the eventual progress of humanity. He saw generations as standing on the steps of a staircase; each generation a little higher up—and all of them climbing cheerfully, even though they don’t necessarily have the goal in sight. But they are climbing; they are reaching higher. To tie this back to what you said: Are we—you and I, our contemporaries—on a «step of transformation»? Is change our destiny?

That is precisely the meaning of our existence here. I don't know if the meaning of existence here will still be the same for future generations. But that is indeed the meaning of our existence here.

Key Theses of *Man as an Animal*«

1. Disturbed self-image: Humans view themselves as «animals plus X» (for example: plus reason, culture …) — and animals as «humans minus X.» Both views are wrong.

2. (Non-)Sentient Beings: It would be more accurate to view humans as «the only animal» or as «a rational being» among «non-rational beings.».

3. Special Responsibilities: This gives rise to a dual responsibility: Awareness of humanity’s unique capacity for reflection gives rise to a duty to protect all living beings; at the same time, humans must take responsibility for their actions and cannot attribute them to «animalistic impulses.».

Operating hours voluntarily reduced

Clear Channel Switzerland has also implemented internal energy-saving measures as a company, as Diego Quintarelli, Chief Sales & Marketing Officer and member of the Executive Board, explains. These include general guidelines for employee behavior as well as scenarios outlining what to do if the company’s own services were affected. Clear Channel is also a member of the AWS and participates in the association’s voluntary initiatives.

The same applies to Neo Advertising. «We have proactively decided, in consultation with the DOOH industry, to reduce the operating hours of our screens by one hour per day: We will turn off the VBZ screens 60 minutes earlier. The indoor screens will be turned on 30 minutes later and turned off 30 minutes earlier,» says a company spokesperson. In addition, the company is trying to reduce the brightness of the LED screens by asking customers to use darker, less white backgrounds.

Livesystems, the marketing company acquired by Swiss Post, has also reduced the operating hours of its screens. According to Co-CEO Yves Kilchenmann, this has resulted in energy savings of about 40 percent. Numerous energy-saving measures have also already been implemented within the company.

The Zurich Webscreen Debate

In early September, the Zurich City Council called on the executive branch to review the decision to forgo additional digital advertising spaces on public property. This was done not only to save energy, but also to limit advertising in general. What does this mean for those affected? As Yves Kilchenmann explains, no negative effects are being felt at the moment, as no changes have yet been made to the legal framework. On the contrary: the company has received the building permit for the digital billboard on Bahnhofstrasse in Zurich, which is a major milestone for Livesystems. «We believe that digitalization is constantly advancing and holds promise for positive development.» For example, the company uses energy-efficient LED technology with low power consumption and additional benefits such as brightness regulation and lighting control.

According to APG|SGA, the industry’s perception is that it is a handful of individuals who are lobbying particularly hard in the debate over advertising screens. Outdoor advertising has been shown to enjoy a high level of acceptance among the general public—including among the residents of Zurich. Furthermore, it is in high demand among national and regional advertisers as part of an optimal media mix. «Banning screens and digital advertising amounts to patronizing consumers. What’s being overlooked here is that the business sector, cultural organizations, nonprofits, and politics will not stop advertising. Today, the public sector receives approximately 50 percent of the roughly 350 million francs in outdoor advertising revenue in the form of concession fees. These would be lost if an advertising ban were implemented,» the company stated in its response.

And Diego Quintarelli of Clear Channel Switzerland emphasizes that the debate over advertising bans has intensified recently—especially in connection with the issue of electricity consumption. «We’re interested in a fact-based discussion on this topic and are open to it. Measures to reduce electricity consumption and emissions are also areas we’ve been addressing for some time,» says Quintarelli.

Neo Advertising, on the other hand, is particularly affected by the “zero-pub” debate in Geneva. The company is in close contact with relevant associations such as AWS, KS/CS, and SWA to find an industry-wide solution.

Looking to the Future with Optimism

Despite these challenges, the industry is cautiously optimistic about the future. «As the population grows, mobility will continue to increase. Freedom is important to the Swiss people. We felt this particularly strongly during the lockdown. As long as people enjoy being out and about, DOOH will always be highly valued and have a clear purpose,» explains Yves Kilchenmann of Livesystems. He expects DOOH to continue growing strongly in the coming years. On the one hand, digitalization in Switzerland is not yet as advanced as in other countries; on the other hand, new technological possibilities—such as the integration of data, content, and social media, along with related bookings via programmatic advertising—will make DOOH even more efficient, tap into new customer groups, and further strengthen the medium.

Clear Channel also has a positive outlook: «We continue to pursue our consistent strategy of digitalization and innovation in the field of outdoor advertising solutions. This is to meet the individual needs of our advertisers. Out-of-home advertising is firmly established in the media mix and stands out for its rapid reach expansion, fair value for money, and creative advertising opportunities with real impact,» emphasizes Diego Quintarelli.

And Nadja Mühlemann explains that APG|SGA continues to be in good shape and is on a solid footing—the medium- and long-term market and earnings outlook for its operating business remains positive. «We are convinced that outdoor advertising—once we have weathered the pandemic and, unfortunately, now the war in Ukraine as well, and despite the electricity shortage—will continue to perform well.» As a public medium, outdoor advertising comes across as authentic and trustworthy and provides guidance without being overly intrusive. Especially in times like these, with challenging geopolitical, health, and macroeconomic conditions, there is a greater need than ever for ways to reach people through balanced and accessible communication.

Nevertheless, there is a need for action: «We are very aware that, in light of current issues such as sustainability, energy, anti-advertising movements, hyper-consumption, and urban development, we have reached an important turning point for our media sector. To underestimate this would be a terrible mistake,» says the spokesperson for Neo Advertising. «We need to better understand the fears underlying these issues, communicate more effectively, align our current strategies even more closely with them, and find solutions for what our role and place in tomorrow’s world should look like.»

«A study shows that, of all advertising media, DOOH is by far the most environmentally friendly.»

Markus Ehrle, president of the AWS (Outdoor Advertising Switzerland) association, on the electricity consumption of digital screens and the voluntary restrictions adopted by outdoor advertisers since October 2022.

m&k: Markus Ehrle, how much electricity does an average digital outdoor advertising screen consume, and what does that amount to for Switzerland as a whole?

Markus Ehrle: It is important to distinguish between different formats here: The hourly energy consumption of a backlit poster (F200L) is 0.029 kWh, while that of an indoor ePanel (85-inch) is 0.312 kWh, and that of an outdoor ePanel (75-inch) is 0.700 kWh—all significantly lower than, for example, video streaming on a TV (65-inch, 4K, wired connection), which consumes 1.3 kWh. For Switzerland as a whole, this means that the three major out-of-home advertising companies belonging to the AWS (Out-of-Home Advertising Switzerland) association—APG|SGA, Clear Channel, and Neo Advertising—which are members of the AWS (Outdoor Advertising Switzerland) association—have a total annual energy consumption of approximately 5,400,000 kWh for screens larger than 55 inches. A study from Germany shows that DOOH is by far the most environmentally friendly of all advertising media.

Since early October, outdoor advertisers have been voluntarily turning off their screens earlier. Does this initiative really make sense?

Manufacturers and operators of screens are well aware of this issue: Thanks to built-in light sensors, a modern screen adjusts to the ambient light: At dusk and in the dark, the brightness is dimmed; in daylight—and, of course, depending on the amount of sunlight—it shines a bit more brightly. Light pollution is caused by a large portion of the light being emitted upward. The screen’s light is directed laterally, meaning it is focused on passersby. It is in the interest of outdoor advertising companies to ensure that the screens do not shine too brightly. This, in turn, disturbs passersby and has a negative impact on how the content is perceived. The screens operate at a comfortable brightness level that is adapted to the surroundings and have no negative impact on the environment. The light source is also too weak to cause unwanted light scattering or interfere with traffic on the road—which complies with safety regulations.