Skip to content
    ← Podcast
    PERSONAL BRANDING
    Podcast 14 min read

    How to Build a Standout Brand w/ Mo Ismail

    with Mo Ismail

    Chris Do and Mo Ismail examine how a clear personal brand can accommodate conviction, curiosity, and growth.

    Chris Do

    Chris Do

    Founder, The Futur™ · February 25, 2026

    The cost of becoming easy to recognize

    A recognizable brand can start to feel like a restriction. Mo Ismail, who describes building a business while growing his online presence, brings that tension to his conversation with Chris Do: the fear that becoming known for one thing requires hiding everything else. His perspective matters because he keeps pressing on the personal cost of advice that sounds straightforward from the outside.

    Choose a lane. Develop a point of view. Make the work recognizable. Each instruction promises clarity, but together they can sound like an order to become less complicated.

    Ismail is not defending random commentary or claiming expertise he has not earned. He wants to understand how someone with several genuine interests can express them without undermining the work that already gives an audience a reason to pay attention.

    That is a more demanding problem than choosing a content category.

    Do approaches it through a deliberately provocative instruction: “Pick a fight.” The phrase invites precisely the misunderstanding Ismail identifies. It can sound like a recommendation to manufacture conflict, attack a competitor, or attach a professional identity to whatever argument is currently attracting attention.

    Do means something narrower. A useful fight makes a real conviction visible. It establishes what a person believes strongly enough to challenge, rather than merely identifying subjects they are willing to discuss.

    A distinctive position needs a genuine disagreement. In Do's account, repeating the prevailing view gives an audience little reason to distinguish one voice from another. But disagreement alone is not an achievement. Being different and being defensible are separate requirements.

    His conditions are specific:

    • The position must reflect a belief that is genuinely held.
    • The subject must matter enough to warrant sustained attention.
    • The challenge should face someone or something with greater power and resources.
    • The purpose cannot simply be to stir up controversy.

    The power relationship matters. Do distinguishes confronting a larger institution from targeting people with less protection or representation. One can require courage. The other can amount to bullying dressed as independence.

    Ismail introduces the practical objection that prevents this from becoming an easy celebration of boldness: public expression has consequences. Clients can leave. Professional relationships can change. An opinion can become more visible than the work that originally brought people to a platform.

    The conversation does not establish that those risks disappear when a belief is sincere. Instead, it exposes a decision that branding advice often leaves unresolved: which convictions belong in public, and which public role a person is actually trying to occupy.

    The distinction is crucial. A brand cannot become specific without excluding something. Yet specificity does not require broadcasting every belief, nor does authenticity require treating every private concern as a public assignment.

    The task is not to become louder. It is to become legible without becoming a caricature.

    A position is not a provocation

    Do's own examples make his definition of a fight more concrete. He challenges the belief that professional worth should be measured by time and effort. He challenges education that leaves students carrying heavy debt. He challenges people selling instruction without experience sufficient to support it.

    These are not interchangeable controversies. They connect to the subjects he has chosen to teach: creative business, pricing, communication, and personal branding.

    The strongest fight belongs to the work. It explains why the work exists and what it seeks to change. Do's description of The Futur as “private art school without the crippling debt” is a positioning statement because it identifies both an aspiration and an objection.

    The promise is access to a kind of education. The objection is the burden attached to an established route toward it. The contrast gives the company a reason to exist beyond adding another educational product to the market.

    That educational tension also sits behind the related conversation The State of Design Education. Here, however, the immediate issue is how a stated objection can make a professional mission easier to understand.

    Do's pricing example works similarly. Rejecting time and effort as the sole measure of worth is not simply an attention tactic. It is a disagreement that can support teaching, examples, and continued examination.

    A durable position has somewhere to go after the initial declaration.

    Ismail's resistance is useful because it reveals an apparent contradiction. Do encourages authenticity while also describing restraint around politics and religion in his public content. For someone trying to integrate more of themselves into a brand, that restraint can look like another demand to remain palatable.

    But Do is not presenting neutrality as a universal rule. He says his public purpose is to help people achieve particular results, and he does not want his political commentary to displace that purpose. A political commentator would have a different relationship to those same subjects.

    The relevant boundary is therefore not between safe and dangerous opinions. It is between a considered contribution and a statement that arrives without a clear relationship to the speaker's work.

    That boundary still leaves room for disagreement. A creator can challenge assumptions within a field without turning every publication into a referendum on their entire identity. Selectivity can make conviction more visible by keeping unrelated arguments from overwhelming it.

    This is also where Do's instruction becomes more exacting than ordinary contrarianism. An opposing view must carry the weight of explanation. It needs reasons, experience, and enough understanding to survive scrutiny beyond the first provocative sentence.

    Otherwise, the conflict becomes the product. The professional contribution disappears behind the performance of having an opinion.

    Publishing is not the same as contributing

    Do is particularly suspicious of content that borrows the appearance of insight while serving a different purpose. He draws a hard distinction between expressing a considered point of view and publishing primarily to generate business.

    Marketing should not masquerade as human connection. This is his argument, not a claim that commercial communication has no legitimate place. The problem is concealment: an audience is offered the language of generosity or curiosity when the actual objective is to move it toward a transaction.

    His example is familiar from his own inbox. A stranger announces admiration for his content, then quickly pivots to an offer involving appointments or increased revenue. The opening attempts to establish personal connection; the repetition reveals a script.

    The pitch is not objectionable simply because it is a pitch. It becomes irritating because the relationship it claims has not been established.

    That tension gives the related episode You Don't Need a Personal Brand. You Need an Offer. a useful place beside this conversation. The objectives of an offer and a public identity deserve to be distinguished, even when one person is responsible for both.

    Do applies a similar test to educational content. A familiar story with new typography and different colors does not automatically become a new contribution. Visual ownership and intellectual contribution are not the same thing.

    Ismail pushes back against an overly narrow definition of originality. Two people can address the same subject through different experiences, and a reader can connect with one explanation more readily than another. Repetition of a topic does not necessarily mean repetition of thought.

    The difference lies in what the second speaker adds.

    Do's criticism targets repetition without meaningful adjustment. He includes himself in that criticism rather than treating imitation as a problem exclusive to less experienced creators. The standard is not whether a subject has been covered before, but whether the new treatment contains an actual point of view.

    His discussion of AI follows the same logic. He says he uses it, but does not treat generated language as a substitute for judgment. The output still has to represent what he intends to say.

    • Read the output rather than treating completion as approval.
    • Decide whether the argument reflects an actual belief.
    • Edit language that does not represent the intended meaning.
    • Retain responsibility for the published result.

    These are editorial obligations, not a rejection of technology. The tool can help articulate a position; it cannot make the publisher's agreement unnecessary.

    For Ismail's original dilemma, this distinction offers a useful correction. A broader range of subjects is not inherently a stronger expression of identity. Neither is a narrower range. What matters is whether the person publishing has done enough thinking to contribute something that is recognizably theirs.

    Restraint can be evidence of expertise

    There is an uncomfortable implication in Do's argument: caring about a subject does not establish the ability to explain it responsibly. Strong feelings can motivate inquiry, but they do not eliminate the need for it.

    Conviction needs evidence before amplification. Do compresses the principle into a sharp sentence: “You're supposed to find facts to form an opinion.” His concern is the reverse sequence, forming a position first and searching selectively for material that will defend it.

    The distinction becomes especially important when a speaker already has an audience. Reach increases the consequences of a weak argument. A large platform can make an unexamined reaction appear more authoritative than it deserves.

    Do illustrates this through his own recollection of posting during the Black Lives Matter movement. He describes feeling distressed and pressured to speak, then receiving criticism from people in Black and Brown communities who believed he did not know enough about the subject.

    That account is not evidence of a single community consensus. It is his description of feedback that changed how he understood his role.

    He says he took the criticism seriously because other people had invested more deeply in the history, experience, and scholarship involved. His visibility did not automatically make his contribution the one most needed.

    For a conversation about standing out, this is an important complication. Sometimes the responsible use of a platform is not to occupy more space.

    His design example brings the same issue closer to his own professional territory. A new logo appears, and commentary can collapse into immediate aesthetic judgment. A shape looks wrong. A familiar element has disappeared. A redesign feels unnecessary.

    Do argues that a professional assessment should involve more than that reaction. It should consider the client, the business, and the circumstances surrounding the work. The surface is visible; the constraints are not always available to the person commenting.

    This does not mean that only credentialed specialists can have opinions. Ismail explicitly separates knowing nothing about a subject from beginning to explore it. Do also describes fishing as a genuine interest without claiming an academic qualification in it.

    The useful distinction is between sharing an experience and implying comprehensive authority. A person can speak honestly about what they have encountered while remaining clear about what they have not studied.

    That leaves room for growth without rewarding pretense. New interests can enter public work as interests, observations, or developing questions. They do not have to arrive packaged as mastery.

    Ismail's concern about staying in a lane becomes less restrictive under that standard. The boundary is not a permanent ban on unfamiliar territory. It is a demand to match the confidence of the claim to the depth of the understanding behind it.

    Authority is not demonstrated by having an answer to everything. Sometimes it is demonstrated by knowing which answer has not yet been earned.

    The trunk comes before the treehouse

    Do's answer to the fear of becoming one-dimensional is a tree. The central trunk represents the work a person wants to be known for. Other interests form branches that can feed it, extend it, and eventually support more complexity.

    The metaphor matters because it replaces a static category with a structure capable of growth.

    Build depth before expanding the public identity. Do does not argue that every interest must be integrated immediately. He describes integration as something that has developed over years, not as a prerequisite for beginning.

    In his account, graphic design supplied an early foundation. Running a creative agency added entrepreneurial experience. Business coaching introduced another layer: pricing, negotiation, delegation, managing people, and the value of time.

    Those experiences had direct relevance to the agency before they became material for public teaching. They were useful in the work itself, rather than collected solely to make a more interesting online identity.

    When Do began making YouTube content in 2014, he says those strands could come together. Agency experience supplied subject matter. Work on commercials and music videos supplied production knowledge. Business coaching supplied concepts that could be applied to the commercial realities creative professionals faced.

    The account fits naturally beside Moving from Makers to Entrepreneurs: the change in professional role becomes part of what a creative practitioner can eventually teach. Here, that accumulated experience also explains why a broader public identity did not have to be invented from scratch.

    Yet Do is careful not to equate production capability with audience connection. He recalls having cameras, a stage, and a crew while still lacking the on-camera ability of creators working with fewer resources.

    Experience transferred unevenly.

    That admission prevents the story from becoming an effortless account of talents falling into place. Existing skills created advantages, but they did not remove the need to learn a new form of communication.

    His interest in mixed martial arts provides a different example. He describes watching fights and attending events while running the agency, then later producing promotions for Spike TV's The Ultimate Fighter. An outside interest eventually intersected with professional work.

    The connection was not required on the first day.

    • Graphic design provided a professional foundation.
    • Agency ownership supplied experience with business decisions.
    • Video production supported the practical demands of publishing.
    • Business coaching added material for teaching creative professionals.

    Do describes personal style as a more recent addition. Rather than presenting himself as a fashion authority, he acknowledges gaps in his knowledge of materials, manufacturing, and brand history. The interest can add dimension without replacing the established foundation.

    His treehouse extension makes the limit clear. A structure has to be strong enough to carry what is added to it. More interests do not automatically produce a richer brand if the underlying expertise remains too weak to support the weight.

    Curiosity still has an operating cost

    The tree metaphor explains coherence. It does not, by itself, explain capacity. A professional can see a conceptual relationship between several interests and still lack the time, money, or energy to pursue them together.

    Do introduces another distinction: activities can support one another, or one can drain the resources needed to sustain the other. He describes these relationships as symbiotic and parasitic.

    Judge expansion by its resource demands. The practical question is not merely whether an interest is authentic. It is whether the commitment can coexist with the work, relationships, and responsibilities already in place.

    Do names concrete warning signs: a business moving in the wrong direction, an eighty-hour working week, and becoming a stranger to one's family. These are not failures of personal coherence. They are evidence that the allocation of attention is no longer working.

    Ismail presses for an example that complicates the neat success story. If all of Do's interests eventually supported his public work, the framework risks looking obvious only in retrospect.

    Do responds with the early relationship between Blind, his creative agency, and the educational business that later became The Futur. He says the agency continued earning money while the new venture consumed money, space, time, and energy.

    By his own definition, the new venture was initially a drain.

    That admission is essential. The filter does not divide all projects permanently into good and bad. A project that eventually matters can begin by consuming resources without providing a return. The real issue is whether the host business can survive the experiment.

    Do credits capable employees, business and creative leadership, and existing systems with allowing the agency to operate while his attention moved elsewhere. He could return when needed without remaining involved in every part of the work.

    His recollection also includes resistance from his business coach, who questioned why he was not focusing on the activity already generating the most money. Do did not yet have a fully resolved explanation of what the new company would become.

    Curiosity was leading. Infrastructure was containing the risk.

    That combination is more instructive than a simple instruction to follow an interest. The freedom to experiment was supported by work already done inside the operating business. Without that foundation, the same decision would carry different consequences.

    This is the operational side of Ismail's branding dilemma. Expressing more of a person can require building more of an organization. The public identity is only one visible part of the commitment.

    An additional topic can mean research and practice. A new venture can mean staff, equipment, and losses. A new publishing habit can mean taking attention away from clients or family.

    The distinction is not between disciplined professionals and curious ones. It is between curiosity that has a support system and curiosity that silently spends resources the rest of life cannot afford to lose.

    A brand is not a permission slip

    By the end of the exchange, Ismail sees something liberating in Do's account. A professional can establish expertise without abandoning other interests. A public identity can become more layered as experience accumulates.

    But Do resists describing that realization as permission.

    Audience approval cannot determine personal worth. The distinction changes the endpoint of the conversation. A creator who needs authorization to expand a brand remains dependent on someone else to decide which parts of themselves are acceptable.

    Do is willing to offer language, examples, and a point of view. He does not want agreement with him to become a condition of action.

    That is consistent with his earlier argument about public expression. If every idea is adjusted until it receives approval, the resulting content can become less representative of the person producing it. Recognition starts functioning as an editor with unlimited authority.

    Ismail describes that process clearly: an expression feels true, the expected response does not arrive, and the creator begins filtering or diluting it. The absence of validation becomes evidence that the idea should not have been expressed.

    The related conversation Dealing With Negative Feedback belongs alongside this tension. Here, the issue is not whether feedback should exist, but whether a response is allowed to become a verdict on the speaker's worth.

    Nothing in the exchange makes outside judgment irrelevant. Earlier, Do describes criticism that helped him recognize the limits of his knowledge. The distinction is between learning from a response and surrendering responsibility for every decision to it.

    That distinction produces a practical standard without requiring a new personality or an elaborate publishing formula. The work begins with an honest accounting of what is already present:

    • Identify the subject supported by substantial experience and study.
    • Challenge an idea that genuinely conflicts with the mission.
    • Let additional interests develop without forcing immediate integration.
    • Protect the resources that make continued experimentation possible.

    For someone early in a career, the emphasis falls on getting good at the work and becoming known for it. For someone with an established foundation, the challenge changes: additional dimensions can be introduced without pretending the earlier identity was incomplete or false.

    Neither position requires turning every private pleasure into a professional asset. Do explicitly allows for interests that remain separate, provided they do not undermine the central commitments. Some connections emerge later. Others do not need to become content at all.

    The sharpest challenge is therefore not to reveal more. It is to distinguish substance from performance, exploration from claimed authority, and sustainable expansion from distraction.

    A recognizable brand needs enough consistency to earn trust and enough room to reflect a developing person. The lane is useful only while it helps the work become clearer.

    Build something worth recognizing. Do not become dependent on being recognized.

    TRANSCRIPT

    One of the biggest dilemmas that I've personally faced in my pursuit of growing my presence online while building a business has been my desire and passions around many other things and feeling like I would limit myself when showing up in my lane. And I think many people also feel that way. So in this conversation with personal branding expert, Christo, we're going to dive into what it means to even have a lane, what it means to pick a fight, as he calls it, to develop that, but also how to integrate the other parts of you that feel very resonant, but you may not have the words or skill set to do so. So stick around. It's a deep, deep dive. Can't wait for you to enjoy. You made a post on LinkedIn and you told people to pick a fight. And I think if people didn't read the whole thing, they would assume like, oh, I'm supposed to just go out here and absolutely just dog something or be like a rebel without a cause or whatnot. I'd love for you to expand for us where that notion came from for you. Pick a fight. And why is that so important when it comes to showing up online or showing up in general? I guess as a person who feels worthy, who feels like I know who I am, that I accept it, and I love who I am, I'm more free to speak my opinions. And I find that the more people I speak to, so many people are afraid of speaking up, sharing something that might ruffle a few feathers. I think a lot of it is around their professional concerns. They're afraid if they say something, then they'll lose a client or lose a potential client, or it could be divisive. And I'm not trying to be divisive, but I got to speak my truth into the universe. And then I think it was like a year and a half, two years ago, I came across a video or a post by Mark Manson, the author of The Subtle Art of Not Giving an F. And he said something like, if you want to be a one percenter, and I thought this was about money and wealth, it was just like the top 1 % of people are contrarian by nature. They go against the mainstream. They do things that are counterintuitive. And the reason why they do that is because if you do and say and think what everyone else is saying, doing, and thinking, what is the point of you saying and doing and thinking anything? So we're not sheeple. We're not all trying to say the exact same things. And he says, well, it's easy to be a contrarian because all you have to do is say something silly, like the moon is made of cheese. That's contrarian. And you could do that, but then you'd just be a fool. So he goes, the trick is to be a correct contrarian, to say something that is different than what everyone else is saying and to be correct. and doing and thinking anything so we're not sheeple we're not all trying to say the exact same things and he says well it's easy to be a contrarian because all you have to do is say something silly like the moon is made of cheese that's contrarian and you could do that but then you just be a fool so he goes the trick is to be a correct contrarian to say something that is different than what everyone else is saying and to be correct that's where the sauce is and you can interpret that many different ways but the practical part is pick a fight whenever you pick a fight you're going to be contrarian now there are some guidelines i would like to share with people so don't just go picking a fight with anybody first of all it has to be true to you has to be something you're deeply passionate about it should be true your opinion and not one just to stir up controversy because that's not fun for anybody but you want to pick a fight with someone who's bigger stronger and better funded than you when you pick a fight with someone who's weaker than you that's called bullying this is the mistake a lot of people make so i don't care what your political persuasion is people have a loud box to speak from and what they do is they pick on marginalized groups who are underrepresented and it doesn't look good it looks like you're being very insensitive but to pick a fight against a big tobacco or big pharma you're going to be all right because they have way more resources than you they have attorneys they have strategists and writers and pr people they have handlers and it's just you we talk about this it's like what is courage courage is deciding to do something despite the overwhelming odds that you're going to fail and so you need to be courageous if you know you're going to win the fight don't pick a fight that's what we find to be noble and something worth looking up to a desirable trait that's why i say i think i stand with the people that reacted to having professional concerns to picking a fight because hearing this right now from you what's coming alive for me is for what why even do this how does this connect to me building a brand online that then allows me to serve in the areas that i want to serve how does this connect to my business does it always have to connect to my business what are the ramifications of this particularly after things that have happened recently when you see people are losing their jobs by making comments about their so -called truth whether it be without getting overly political charlie or palestine or trump or all these other things and then they're coming back online and saying oh my god i just lost my job so i'm curious where's the line here when this is necessary when it's not and is it even necessary at all when it comes to the professional concern around it let's dismantle that question one part at a time it's a lot why write anything what is the point of writing whether it's in your journal for an article or for social media why write mo i mean for me personally i feel like i have a message inside of me that just has to come out that's just me personally and i have a fundamental belief that there's somebody out there that can concern around it. Let's dismantle that question one part at a time. It's a lot, huh? Why write anything? What is the point of writing? Whether it's in your journal for an article or for social media, why write, Mo? I mean, for me personally, I feel like I have a message inside of me that just has to come out. That's just me personally. And I have a fundamental belief that there's somebody out there that can only be liberated by hearing it from me specifically, even if me and other people are saying the same thing. So that's where I personally stand. Is there a higher calling then? For me, yes. I feel like I'm connected to the divine and through me, something is being transmitted. All right. I see it. So we write because we have something stirring in our soul and I would consider it art. You're an artist with words and you're trying to communicate an idea, an emotion, some energy, something so that somewhere you, the sender, and then the receiver can connect even through the vast space of the internet across borders and boundaries and cultures. Your message can hit somebody. I think that's a really profound thing. What is the point of you saying what everyone else is saying then? Who said I'm saying what everyone else is saying? Well, that's what I'm saying. If you don't pick a fight, why write? Why express this thing that's stirring inside of you? Everyone else is already saying it. Oh, if everyone is already saying it? Yes. For me personally, it's because it's alive inside of me. It's my truth. It's what I want to talk about. Yeah. Okay. Do you believe the internet to be pretty noisy? Oh, for sure. I don't have the exact stats, but it's something like in the turn of the century, like we're talking about the 1800s, 1900s. There aren't a lot of educated people. It could be said that an educated person in England at the time only has the knowledge of a single newspaper. Like all of what they know can be contained in a single newspaper from front to back. Fast forward to 2025. And now you're like, we have way more knowledge than that. An educated person does. So there's a lot of noise that's out there. And if you were to literally see a post that someone else wrote that said exactly the same thing that you did, are you not just contributing to the noise by saying the exact same thing again? If we're saying the exact same thing, yeah. Which a lot of people do. They just regurgitate. Many people will regurgitate, but many people are also saying the same thing from different lenses, different perspectives. Yeah. Like you talk about personal brand from a very specific lens. Other people talk about it from a very specific lens, so on and so forth. Right. So here's the thing. Let's just take reality at face value here. I would be willing to wager with you that there's no empirical evidence of this just yet, but we could probably do some research on this. I would guess that 70 to 80 % of the content that's out there is just regurgitation with very little adjustment. And it's probably being accelerated by AI. Now people are not even thinking anymore. They're just like, write for me. And they just write. And then they don't know to edit it. They don't want to curate it. They just want stuff out there because this is what everyone else is doing. And the problem with anything is if you do what everyone else is doing, you're to get what everyone else is getting. I would guess that 70 to 80 % of the content that's out there is just regurgitation with very little adjustment and it's probably being accelerated by AI. Now, people are not even thinking anymore. They're just like, write for me and they just write and then they don't know to edit it. They don't want to curate it. They just want stuff out there because this is what everyone else is doing. And the problem with anything is if you do what everyone else is doing, you're to get what everyone else is getting. And if you think about it, look behind me and look behind you. have some books. What percentage of the population have gotten to a point in which they have clear enough ideas and have the follow through to actually write a book? What do you think? There are eight some billion people on planet Earth. How many authors are there, you think? Probably very low compared to the population. Probably. You think like 1 %? We'll call it that. I know if you have a PhD, for example, you're 1 % of like the 10 % of the world. So there's that. It's like 0 .1 % now. Yeah, it's like 0 .1 % of the world have a PhD. So who's written a book? I'm going to assume less than that. So now we're sitting here thinking, okay. And those are the people who write because it's something stirring in their soul. They have a point of view. They are well -read, well -researched. And they want to add to the canon of human knowledge. They want to contribute to that. And so I kind of look at it from that lens. If you're going to write something, you're going to do something. What is your take on this? And I can tell you right now, just by my own experience scrolling through the IG feed, so much of it is regurgitated content, even from so -called thought leaders and publishers of content. I'm like, I already read that from somebody else. This is just a different skin on it. When I say different skin, I mean, you change the color, you change the typeface, but you really haven't added anything to it. They're the same stories that are being regurgitated over and over again. So somebody researched the original story, wrote about it, spent the time, and now everyone else, and I put myself in there, is regurgitating that content. So why even write? We're just contributing to the noise that's out there. And we fool ourselves to think that I'm learning about myself, my thoughts, and I'm helping people, which I'm not. I do it because this is what I'm told that I need to do as a quote -unquote thought leader. So that's one of the problems. Problem number two is if you're writing as a means to grow your business, I don't call that branding at all, and I just can't emphasize this enough. If you're writing to grow your business, that's called marketing. And if you're a marketing major, marketing communications director, CMO, by all means, this is what you're supposed to be doing. And if you're not, it's not in your title, it's not your responsibility, then what are you doing? You're using marketing in the disguise of thought leadership because your primary focus isn't thought leadership at all. It's to pitch your offer. It's to call people to take action to buy a product or a service from you. And that, I think, is also what's wrong with the world. I can't get into my DMs anymore because they're all marketing, pretending to be a genuine human connection. And I think for maybe comedic purposes, I might want to video capture every single message. isn't thought leadership at all. It's to pitch your offer. It's to call people to take action to buy a product or a service from you. And that, I think, is also what's wrong with the world. I can't get into my DMs anymore because they're all marketing, pretending to be a genuine human connection. And I think for maybe comedic purposes, I might want to video capture every single message that's coming in on Instagram. It's all the same. Big fan of your content. First of all, don't follow me. Kind of interesting. Big fan of your content. I noticed you're a coach. Would you be opposed to tripling your revenue per month? I'm a professional appointment setter. This is what I do. Copy, paste, copy, paste, copy, paste. Over and over and over again. What are we doing? I think human nature is that we want to work, make the least effort to do something to get a result that we want. It requires discipline. It requires intellectual rigor. Go and think about what you think about and find a way to say it. I'm not against AI at all. I use AI all the time. But I want to make sure it represents what I want to say and some of it has my DNA in it. I need to read this and say, do I agree with this? Is this said better than what I could say? Otherwise, what am I doing here? I'm just contributing to the noise. So again, I don't want to mix these two worlds up because you had asked, well, people start speaking their opinion and they lost their job or they're losing clients. Well, were you writing marketing copy? Probably. Do you mean, were you positioned initially as someone who writes marketing copy? And now that you're sharing your opinion, well, naturally it's going to mess up your business stuff because what the, is that what you mean? If you were, yes, if you were expressing your opinions on lots of things, sharing thought leadership and doing some form of public journaling, well, of course you're going to share your opinions. What is the point if you don't? You're going to speak about deeply personal things, hardships, triumphs, success, challenges. You're going to share stories about the people that you meet and what you learn. But that's not what's happening. So people are like, well, nine out of 10 times it's marketing stuff and then Palestine, Israel, Charlie Kirk, right, left. What is going on? It's coming out of left field. Now, if you have been a civil rights activist and that's what you post about, well, why would it be turned off? This is what they expect to see from you. So you'll notice in my feed and somebody sent me a DM recently. He said, I've been following your content for quite some time. And I'm so glad that you just talk about ideas. I don't even know what religion if you are. I don't know what political leaning you are. And I like it like that. That's because that's who I am. In private, I'll tell you about my opinions on lots of things. But in public, I'm here to help people achieve a goal, achieve a result. And I don't want to let my political musings get in the way of that. And I'm so glad that you just talk about ideas. I don't even know what religion if you are. I don't know what political leaning you are. And I like it like that. That's because that's who I am. In private, I'll tell you about my opinions on lots of things. But in public, I'm here to help people achieve a goal, achieve a result. And I don't want to let my political musings get in the way of that. But if I'm a political commentator, I'm a political junkie, I need to talk about politics. Can you speak to this a little bit? The depth of this, because I feel like those who know probably just recognized a key element of branding that you just mentioned, kind of as speaking. But I'm just, I'm trying to channel the person who's like, you're telling me to pick a fight. You're telling me to be authentic online. You're telling me to share my thoughts, feelings, and what's alive inside of me. But then you just said, well, yeah, but I am someone who is here to serve somebody on my platform. Therefore, I'm selective on what I share. I hate to say it for me, even hearing this, it just feels like two conflicting ideas. And maybe I'm understanding it because it's like, be authentic, show yourself. And then when I do, it's like, oh, wait, hold on, hold on. You're, you're supposed to be pretty, you know, palatable, man. Like, you know, accepting all this kind of stuff. So can you speak to that? I don't even know if I'm making sense, but that's what's coming to me right now. No, it's making sense. It's also because if you are listening with very biased ears of thinking about your own life and not listening to what I'm saying, you'll come to similar conclusions. So I have to like clarify and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify. Well, I pick fights with all kinds of things. As you may know, for example, the belief that worth is tied to time and effort. That's an old model, an old idea. I'm picking a fight with anyone who calls themselves a personal branding expert who's putting out content to teach you how to market. Those are ideas. I want to fight in the realm of ideas and philosophy. And if I was, I had a stronger opinion about some of these other things, I'll talk about them too. Well, here's an example, okay? The future is an education company. Why do I need to create an education company when so many exist? Well, I have to kind of figure out what everyone's doing and see if what I'm doing is any bit different. If I'm doing the exact same thing, I just should go work for them. And that's the thing. So I've said to people many times, the future is like private art school without the crippling debt. I'm picking a fight. against so -called gurus who are recurgitating info products based on knowledge they've not acquired through experience. Where are the receipts? These are things I deeply care about and things I've been talking about for quite some time. I'm picking a fight against the trolls who say this can't be done. So if you read a post, if you watch a video, if you're not feeling either I'm all in on what Chris is saying or I'm all against it, then you're not really finding a lane into which you can own. I want to be clear about that. And you know what we don't need? a lot of reckless opinions being thrown out there. Every time a logo comes up. Things I've been talking about for quite some time. I'm picking a fight against the trolls who say this can't be done. So if you read a post, if you watch a video, if you're not feeling either I'm all in on what Chris is saying or I'm all against it, then you're not really finding a lane into which you can own. I want to be clear about that. And you know what we don't need? a lot of reckless opinions being thrown out there. Every time a logo comes up, a rebrand, 99 .9 % of the amateur designers start speaking up. Notice very few professional designers say, I hate this. is stupid. Why don't they just go with that? That's very true. Now that you say that out loud, the thought leaders of the design space, the ones actually doing the work, are never coming out and - Very rarely. Very, unless it's like astronomically a fail or a win, and then they'll speak on it. Well, sometimes like that Cracker Barrel thing that's gone all over the internet, everybody's got an opinion. And you know what? Everyone's got an A -hole too, and I don't want to hear or see either. And the reason why the professional, the luminaries of the design space, why they say something, it's not because it's astronomically bad or good. It's because the media is picking up on this now, and they'll be interviewed by legitimate design magazines saying, we'd like your thoughts on this. And what they have to do is they have to do research, and they have to give a considerable thought. They have to look at it from multiple angles. As a practitioner, working with clients like that, what the global concerns are in terms of the market share and what's going on in the business, things that most creatives don't really think about, unfortunately. They're merely commenting on gut instinct and emotional reaction to purely aesthetic forms. And so the classic is, why isn't this a perfect circle? That just says volumes about the lack of education in the design community, because optically, it doesn't look like a circle when it's a circle. Mathematically, it's not, but optically, it is. So it's just saying, you didn't go to school. You don't understand things. Like the Romans, the way they designed massive monuments, they understood, like if you made it perfectly straight, it would look bent. So they would bend it the other way so that when you looked at it, looked straight again. They've known this for 2 ,000 years. So every Yahoo, everybody who's got a computer and a keyboard, they get at it. And I don't want that either. So it's during the Black Lives Matter movement, people are like, you need to speak up on this. Well, this is not my lane. But I felt so compelled. I was so emotionally distraught over what was going on in America. The seemingly kind of lack of civil, what is it, civil rights, civil justice. It was just bothering me. So finally, I caved in. I wrote something. I made a post. And you know what happened? People in the Black and Brown community said, you don't know enough about this. Don't say anything. So I was like, what? Like, yeah, you don't. Because you have a big voice and a big platform. You don't know enough about this. kind of lack of civil, what is it, civil rights, civil justice. It was just bothering me. So finally, I'm like, I caved in. I wrote something, I made a post. And you know what happened? People in the black and brown community said, you don't know enough about this, don't say anything. So I was like, what? Like, yeah, you don't, because you have a big voice and a big platform. There are way more educated people about this who deeply care, and they need to be heard. So we'd appreciate if you stayed out of it. And I took that to heart. It's like, you're right. Because from the outside, it could look like I'm just jumping on some kind of bandwagon. I'm virtue signaling. I don't think about these things on a daily basis. I'm not well -researched. I don't know the first five or 10 books I'm supposed to be reading on this subject. I do not understand the African -American plight, as well as someone who is in it, of the culture, who studies it, who talks about it, whose mission it is to kind of right some wrongs. And so they're right. I need to stay out of it. Because what I do is I suck the oxygen out of the room for people who are needing it. That's why I very rarely opine on anything that's not something I put considerable thought and energy and resources against. Doesn't make any sense. So to circle back to kind of the catalyst for this answer, help me make sure that I'm understanding you correctly. It's not that you shouldn't share the things that you love or the things that are alive inside of you or the things that you want to talk about. But I keep hearing you say, understand your lane, number one. Number two, where have you had significant experience from self and also from study? And also, the last thing is like, speak on that more, expand on that more, versus just constantly picking whatever is hot or speaking to, I guess. And again, I'm just sharing what's coming up for me as I hear this, because I agree. And then simultaneously, I'm like, okay, this is great. But what if I'm a multi -hyphenate? But what if I have evolved? But what if that is important to me, but I don't have a lot of experience in it, but I want to share my perspective? It feels to me, and again, I'm channeling the parts of me that are like, you know, activated right now. And also thinking, maybe there's somebody else thinking about this. Are you now telling me like, yo, stay in my lane, be authentic in your lane, but don't fucking, you know what I'm saying? Don't, reach beyond the lane. Stay in the niche, stay in the lane, stay in the thought leadership that you're well on. College football is back. So Hilton called a meet, the superstition concierge, to make your fan rituals a reality. Need a room to match your lucky number? We got you. Want to make sure our team doesn't wash your lucky jersey? Ooh, that smells lucky. Hilton's unmatched hospitality can keep up with any superstition. Even a marching band wake -up call at 555 in 55 seconds. Hit it! When you need a team that will do whatever. College football is back, so Hilton called a meet, the superstition concierge, to make your fan rituals a reality. Need a room to match your lucky number? We got you. Want to make sure our team doesn't wash your lucky jersey? Ooh, that smells lucky. Hilton's unmatched hospitality can keep up with any superstition, even a marching band wake -up call at 555 in 55 seconds. Hit it! When you need a team that will do whatever it takes on game day, it matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Are you asking yourself this question out loud? Do you want to speak on things you know nothing about? I don't want to speak about things that I know nothing about. Okay, let's rule that out right now. That's a rule. That's great. Yes, that's a rule. I don't want to speak about anything I don't know anything about, nor do I want to speak about anything that I'm not passionate about. Because at that point, it's a facade. Those are good rules to live by. And do you think the vast majority of people out there speak on things they know nothing about? I do not think that the vast majority of people speak on things they know nothing about. But I do believe that the vast majority of people can be passionate about multiple things. Well, I disagree with you. So now we're going to pick a fight. Just look all over the internet, man. Okay, fair. Are we being real? They do these bits, right? Whether you're on the left or the right. This is fascinating. So what the right does is they find some college campus kids and they put a microphone in them. What should we do? And they'll say some pretty left ideas. And they ask two questions and the people fall apart. And they get really upset. The ladder with Crowder is kind of like that. He sits down and says, prove me wrong. And people are just all feelings and gut. And they just go out there and then blabber on. And he'll cite some quotes and some statistics. And they can't even respond to that. It's embarrassing. I believe their point of view, but it's just like, have you read anything? Have you done anything about this? What's going on? And the opposite is true. You'll get, I think his name is Jordan. And he's on the Daily Show. And he goes out into the Red MAGA places. He's like, so what do we think? We hate people who commit SA. Yeah, we hate those people, right? Yeah, we hate them. It's like, well, your guy has been convicted of. Oh, I've seen these clips. Yes, yes, yes. Right? Jordan Kelper, I believe his name, something like that. Training the logic. It's like, well, if you believe this, then why do you agree with this? Yeah, it only takes them two or three questions because they say the most outrageous things. Oh, we hate them because they're immigrants. I'm like, our first lady is an immigrant. Well, not her. You know, so people say things all the time without thinking that they don't know anything about. It's because we would rather be a nation or at least a culture of opinions than of facts. You're supposed to find facts to form an opinion. What people do is they form an opinion and they look for the facts to support their opinion. It's kind of gross. So really ask yourself your question. And then you'll see like, oh, yeah, you're right. I guess in real time, I'm realizing my own bias and this has to do with. be a nation or at least a culture of opinions than of facts. You're supposed to find facts to form an opinion. What people do is they've formed an opinion and they look for the facts to support their opinion. Kind of gross. So really ask yourself your question and then you'll see like, oh yeah, you're right. I guess in real time, I'm realizing my own bias and this has to do with training and just why I align with you, for example. Like I'm okay with saying, I don't know. It was some things. So I just realized, you just checked my own bias. Like I wouldn't share about something I don't know or I'm not actively researching or I'm not like sticking my toe in or whatever it might be. How are we to combat the feeling of being authentic while feeling pressured to be in a lane? I feel like the two go against each other from how I'm hearing from you right now. Speak to that for me. Not at all. right. First of all, there's no pressure. Do whatever the hell you want. You don't need to listen to me. I'm not telling you to do anything. I'm just sharing my ideas. So if these ideas excite you, if they clarify things for you, then please, by all means, try to do it. If they don't, I'm not for you. I'm totally cool with that. I'm not telling you I have an exclusive lock on the truth. I just have my truth and I'm going to share it with you. When we talk about our lane, what is our lane? could be really wide, like the 405, or it could be like the one freeway, which is really narrow. And that's up to you. That depends on a lot of your life experiences, what you're passionate about and what you want to talk about. So we can use passion as one metric of, should you be talking about this? Now, we all have different definitions of passion and that's totally okay. For example, I like fishing. I'm very passionate about it. Most of my life revolves around things around the water and pulling things out of it. Am I studied in this? I don't know. I don't have a bachelor's degree on angling. I don't. I know a thing or two. I'm very passionate about it. So can I talk about it? Sure. Do I need somebody's permission to talk about it? No. I can do whatever I want. So if you want to speak about your passion about collecting Barbie dolls, cool. Do that. Find a way to integrate that into the thing you want to be known for. What we're trying to do is, well, at least for me, I'm always trying to work on self -development, Mo. A constant improver. So I'm trying to grow the main trunk of my tree so it's stout and it's strong and it's got deep roots. Now, there may be branches of interest on that tree, but what I don't want to do is have a multi -trunk tree where some wind blows and the whole thing falls over. So I'm going to continue to build on that trunk. There are branches of interest and they support the main trunk. They give it energy. They feed it. And that's how I look at it. So you can be your authentic self. can be complicated. It can be very nuanced, multicultural, very layered, multifaceted. Some wind blows and the whole thing falls over. So I'm going to continue to building on that trunk. There are branches of interest and they support the main trunk. They give it energy. They feed it. And that's how I look at it. So you can be your authentic self. can be complicated. It can be very nuanced, multicultural, very layered, multifaceted. Entirely up to you. I don't think they're in conflict at all. I love the tree analogy and I love the challenge. And I wrote this as a challenge because I think this is where many people get stuck. Try to integrate it into what you want to be known for. I think there's two elements of stuckness here. I think many people don't know what they want to be known for and then they equate that into limitation or niching or a lack of freedom. Then the other thing is maybe they do have something that they want to be known for and they're even very clear about that. They have a desire to integrate similar to you fishing but they don't know how. to integrate it in a way that moves their body of work forward around what they want to be known for. I don't want to make this a conversation about like finding oneself and what you want to be known for. I'd love for you to speak to the second half. If I know what I want to be known for and there's other things that are leaves of this bigger tree but I don't know how to integrate them, how might one do that or what does one have to begin learning to do that effectively? All right. I want to talk about something slightly different first because it just occurred to me. You know a shark, let's say a great white swimming through the ocean, it eats things and then there's like a little leftover stuff stuck on his body. So there's these little sucker fish that are forming a symbiotic relationship with the shark. The shark's cool with them because what they do is they clean off all the little bits. That's symbiotic. They support each other. The shark does the killing. The little sucker fishes, they keep them clean. Now you also see these ones where there's a bird or a squirrel or something and it's got like these parasites burled into its face and they pull them out. It's a parasitic relationship. That means for one organism to survive, the other one will perish. You can look at your interests like this. You're the organism supporting everything. If you find things that are side hustles or passions or other things, ask yourself, is it symbiotic? Do they support each other or is it parasitic? Because when you start to dilute your attention and your resources and your energy, the shark doesn't live and the sucker fish doesn't live. It becomes like the other one. They don't live well. And you can see, as far as I can tell, the main animal is suffering. And when they pull these bugs out, these like flies that burrow into their bodies, they're feeding off the main system and they eventually kill the host, which could lead to its own death. You can see that if they are going through, And you can see the other one. Because there's a lot of fun. dilute your attention and your resources and your energy, the shark doesn't live and the suckerfish doesn't live. It becomes like the other one. They don't live well. And you can see, as far as I can tell, the main animal is suffering. And when they pull these bugs out, these like flies that burrow into their bodies, they're feeding off the main system and they eventually kill the host, which could lead to its own death, but it ain't good. Ground this in an example that you've literally gone through for your own thought leadership, personal brand, this parasitic, symbiotic filter that you're using. The complexity of life is such that sometimes you're really into other interests because you're multi -hyphenate and you can't find the way that they integrate. And that's totally okay because as long as you have the energy to do your main thing, all is good. It's when it distracts from that, when your business is going sideways, when you're working 80 hours a week and you're becoming a stranger to your own family, that's clearly parasitic relationship. So for me, I studied graphic design. I built my career on graphic design. I'm also interested in mixed martial arts. So I'll watch MMA on the weekends. I'll go to fights. I can manage that. And eventually what happens is we wind up doing promos for Spike TV for the Ultimate Fighter TV show for many seasons. Well, guess what? Those two things found a way to come together. On the side, I get business coaching for 13 years. I'm learning about business concepts, about pricing, negotiation, how to manage people, the delegation of work, the value of time. And that helps to support my main business, which is I run a creative agency. The relationship is very clear. But there's a third branch to this tree that we don't see until much, much later. The third branch to this tree is all of a sudden one day in 2014, I start making content on YouTube, where now I'm a YouTuber, for lack of a better term. And how do these other experiences support this? Well, number one, at that point, I think I'm into the professional agency entrepreneur role for probably close to 20 years at that point. And what am I going to make content on? I'm going to make content on the things I've done in the last 20 years. But because part of that career was making commercials and music videos, I also knew how to produce videos. So I can be on -camera talent and behind -the -scenes camera talent. Those two things support each other. Then we bring in this third dimension, which is I've got business coaching. And so I don't know how many years I'm into that. So all these things coalesce into who I am. There are other components, which I'm going to stack into this, but I can show you now how my design career, my entrepreneurial experience, my business coaching and training, and specifically, my experience in producing music videos and commercials, I know how to do this. And so I don't know how many years I'm into that. So all these things coalesce into who I am. There are other components, which I'm going to stack into this, but I can show you now how my design career, my entrepreneurial experience, my business coaching and training, and specifically my experience in producing music videos and commercials, I know how to do this. So back in the day in 2014, I was joking with my friends. I think we're going to be the most overproduced video channel on YouTube because we have multiple cameras. We have a stage. We have crew who know how to do things. Unfortunately, I wasn't very good at hosting the content part, but we can outspend these YouTubers who are just doing things in their bedroom. They were better because they knew how to be better on -camera talent. So their audiences grew much, much faster. So that was a skill I was yet to learn. And speak to me about when it didn't work and you had the discernment to recognize that it was parasitic because I think many people might not be able to see it that way. Like the way you just painted it sounded like it was beautifully orchestrated to happen the way that it happened. I know it wasn't. I have a lot of exposure to you. I know the self -work. I know the personal development. I know the investments I know, but I also know that you are a pretty objective, pretty discerning and clear individual. So if a moment that looks like it could be symbiotic, you can suss out, this might be parasitic. You don't even let yourself go that far, or maybe sometimes it's experimental. I don't know. But I'd love to hear a reflection from you on when that has happened. Well, in 2014, I was running two companies, Blind, and at that point, it was called the school later to become the future. And I only have so much time and resources, though, I told everyone at Blind, hey, I'm going to disappear for a little bit. I cannot do both. I'm going to try to build a new ship. Your job is to keep the ship afloat that we're already in. And they did the best they could without my leadership management and active involvement. But at that point, I've hired very good people, business people, creative people. to run the company, and I don't need to be as involved. There are systems and processes in place. And so we continued to make money while the other company lost money. So it was a parasite, if you think about it, because it was draining resources, money, space, time, and energy from the main company, which people didn't fully understand. In fact, my business coach at that time said, why don't we focus on the thing that's making the most money for us and not this other thing? What is this other thing? I said, I don't even know what it is yet, because we're clearly not making any money on it, and we're not getting famous any time fast. What are we doing here? But I'm usually a guy who's led by my curiosity. But you know what? Unlike most people, I have systems in place that doesn't cause this complete shutdown and meltdown of the main company. Which is key, by the way, to note. It's key, because at that point, you're able to... because we're clearly not making any money on it and we're not getting famous any time fast. What are we doing here? But I'm usually a guy who's led by my curiosity. But you know what? Unlike most people, I have systems in place that doesn't cause this complete shutdown and meltdown of the main company. Which is key, by the way, to note. It's key because at that point, you're able to allocate bandwidth. You're able to take risk in a way that doesn't fry you and fry the main thing. Yeah, so I will reappear, reemerge when necessary. Otherwise, I was going back in the lab, cooking up content, trying to figure out how to do this thing called YouTube. If you remember in 2014 to about 2018, when we're still figuring stuff out, there were very few professional people who were doing what we're doing. They're mostly amateurs who love this idea that they can be famous and they can celebrate their talent and share it online. This is like OG YouTubers. Well, how does that relate to? Well, the new YouTubers are people like Dan Martel, Alex Ramosi, Cody Sanchez, Mel Robbins, people who are accomplished, people who have a lot of resources, who are putting the kind of money and energy into the space because what they've realized, which we figured out pretty early on, building a strong personal brand is an incredible lever to have. So you're saying you were experimenting with this before it was popular? No, I'm not saying that at all. That sounds too self -important. I'm saying we were in a space where zigging or zagging, depending on how you look at it, when there weren't a lot of professionals in it, spending our time and resources, figuring things out. It was kind of unknown at that time. And that did help us out a lot because we're a singular voice in a space where most people were still focused on their primary business, didn't have the luxury to build a secondary business, and we were able to do that. And now it seems like a pretty standard operating protocol for people that if you're a business person, you start to dedicate resources and money and team members towards building content. In fact, you and I are part of different masterminds and groups, a couple hundred people in these groups, spending a pretty significant amount of money trying to build their online presence. They're doing it the wrong way, sorry, but they are doing something because they do realize the same thing. So you've given me kind of a filter and a lens to look at symbiotic versus parasitic and your own examples. What else can you teach us or speak to us on for those that have something they're good at that they're known for? They're willing to pick a fight. They're ready to pick a fight, but they don't know how to integrate these other interests or these other elements of who they are or these other passions. Like you have been able to with Mixed Martial Arts and at the agency time, music video, fishing now with how you write and using it as an example. Speak to us on the integration piece so people aren't fragmented. Well, I don't think you need to be integrated. that they're known for, they're willing to pick a fight, they're ready to pick a fight, but they don't know how to integrate these other interests or these other elements of who they are, these other passions, like you have been able to with Mixed Martial Arts and at the agency time, music video, fishing now with how you write and using it as an example. Speak to us on the integration piece so people aren't fragmented. Well, I don't think you need to be integrated on day one. This is a journey that's 11 years. So when that trunk, the main trunk of what you want to be known for, the thing you have deep passion and expertise and just focus on that. We don't have to be all things at once. And I'm finding out over time, I can continue to add layers to the main trunk. And once you've built up a sturdy enough tree, you can do all kinds of stuff. Like you could say this, right? You don't want to build a treehouse on a tree that's not strong enough to support the weight. Also, you don't want to build a treehouse on a tree that by building a treehouse on a tree, you cause the tree to die. Lots of problems with that. But when the tree is strong enough, you can build all kinds of things on it. It's not going to hurt the tree if you build it the right way. And the example here is in the last year and a half, two years, I've found another area of interest, fashion, personal style. Now, if I came on the scene on day one and started talking about personal style, people are like, you don't know nothing about this. And the truth of the matter is I don't. Why would I follow you? Why would I listen to you? don't know about stitching. You don't know where that fabric comes from. You don't know the main manufacturers of all the luxury houses. You don't know the history of why or where this brand came from. You don't. And they'd be right. And I'd be like every other Yahoo out there, opining about things I know nothing about. And so I have my main trunk, pricing, communications, personal branding, that I add on little things. And people are like, I think that supports the main thing. It doesn't take away. The trunk is strong enough. I can add other things to it. I love this conversation. And it's super nuanced and super layered in my opinion, at least how I'm receiving it, because I think you're speaking to both those that are in the beginning and those that are seasoned and want to leverage this concept of personal branding. What mission are you on? Pick a fight as it relates to that mission. What I just heard, and correct me if I'm wrong or anything that I missed, but if you're in the beginning, the objective is get good at the thing. Get known for the thing you want to be known for. That's it. Build the trunk, experiment, gain clarity through experience and study on what it is you want to be known for. On the other hand, what I think is profound is do not shy away from the little things that you enjoy, whether for you it started off as a seed to fashion and then you got really good at it or communication or even therapy and spirituality and all that kind of work that you integrate into personal branding. And then for me, it feels like flavor. I think you just gave a lot of people permission for those that are later in their career and wanting to add these things into their world of what they're known for. Because I think what whether for you it started off as a seed to fashion and then you got really good at it or communication or even therapy and spirituality and all that kind of work that you integrate into personal branding. And then for me, it feels like flavor. I think you just gave a lot of people permission for those that are later in their career and wanting to add these things into their world of what they're known for. Because I think what happens for many of these people is they're like, well, I can't do that or I can't speak on that or I can't bring that in because it just will never work. So what I just heard is you gave them permission in a way that feels digestible, at least. Great. I don't think any of us should be asking for permission to do anything. Do whatever makes your heart happy. As long as you don't hurt anybody, do whatever makes your heart happy. This is what makes me happy. So I think I saw a piece earlier prior to our conversation about they did this experiment in Japan. And for teachers, they banned the word good. So you couldn't say good morning. You couldn't say good job, good work. So they would just have to describe things for the way they are. That was a blue project. That was a red project. That was a green project. Objectively. And what they realized something is over a very short period of time, I think it was a month or two, the students had deeper conversation with each other. Arguments lasted shorter. They had greater confidence in speaking and doing things because they removed the external validating force from their lives. They learned to look inward for their own validation. Kind of fascinating. So it's like, I don't want to give anybody permission to do anything. Do whatever you want. If you want me to give you permission, I will. But let's move away from this need for someone to tell you it's okay, someone to tell you it's good or bad, because that creates a relationship that's not healthy. I believe that's a parasitic relationship, not a symbiotic one. Because you post something and you're like, this was true to me. And people don't like it. What's that going to do to your idea of worth? Big facts. We've talked about this at length. You start to distort it, dilute it, filter it. Feel like it's not meant to be out there because you didn't receive the recognition and the validation that you're so accustomed to receiving or that you thought you were going to receive, which is a much deeper thing that we have to look at, which is, did I need it at all? Did I not? Why did that come up for me? So we have to shift from extrinsic motivation to intrinsic motivation. What makes us happy? What gives us joy? And do that. Now, I think you said it in the most positive way. Chris, I think you just gave us permission to do that. I was like, let's reframe that. I just shared my point of view. If I articulated ideas that you felt in your heart but couldn't say or to write, then perhaps I helped you find the words and I'm okay with that part. But the last thing I want to do is tell people who have become dependent on me for their permission slip to do whatever they want. That would be kind of anticipation. That would be an important fitness. Chris, I think you just gave us permission to do that. I was like, let's reframe that. I just shared my point of view. If I articulated ideas that you felt in your heart but couldn't say or to write, then perhaps I helped you find the words and I'm okay with that part. But the last thing I want to do is tell people who become dependent on me for their permission slip to do whatever they want. That would be kind of antithetical to everything I stand for. Well, they would just have to pick a fight with you at that point. And I'm happy to fight with you.
    Download transcript

    Enjoyed this? There’s more where it came from.

    Get insights on creativity, business, and design from The Futur.

    You can unsubscribe anytime. By submitting, you agree to receive communications and to our Privacy Policy.

    “You're supposed to find facts to form an opinion.”

    — Chris Do

    Key Takeaways

    Details

    Topic
    PERSONAL BRANDING

    Share