• by Sarah Mahoney , 9 hours ago

Algorithms promised personalization, and for nearly a decade, consumers loved it. They got an endless stream of tailor-made content — for outdoorsy dog lovers who crochet, binge Swedish crime dramas and wear comfortable shoes. But as algorithmic patterning becomes more obvious and heavy-handed, consumers are chafing at being pigeonholed and force-fed the same brands by interchangeable influencers.

Mintel’s 2026 outlook argues the pendulum is swinging back: people want feeds — and brands — that feel human, messy and a little unpredictable. Diana Kelter, director of consumer trends at Mintel, tells Marketing Daily how consumers are learning to negotiate rather than surrender.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Marketing Daily: When did “the algorithm” stop being invisible plumbing and start defining people’s identity?

Diana Kelter: When we look backward, the years between 2010 to 2020, the algorithm was a behind-the-scenes coding tool. It was technical, not a part of our identity. People saw the impact, and felt the convenience of it, the value of it -- but it didn’t really impact their identity or their opinion. They liked the personalization.

During the pandemic, when people were home more and we saw the rise of TikTok, they began to understand much more, and realize their algorithm wasn’t the same as mine. And it became all-consuming -- you couldn’t touch anything without feeling the impact, in social platforms, music, shopping and streaming.

At that point, people began to ask: Is this actually benefiting me, or is it overpowering my own activity, and what I want to discover on my own?

Marketing Daily: So convenience tipped into fatigue -- or even resentment?

Kelter: Yes. People started asking: Am I seeing more of what's making me unhappy? Is this polarizing me? It became too extreme –– they were seeing too many things that were negative, things they didn’t want to be reminded of.

We saw more questions about empowerment, with people feeling that the algorithm was having too much influence. They saw it wasn’t just delivering convenience; they started seeing what we call the darker side of optimization.

Elections made that worse, because algorithms reward polarization and divisiveness.

People saw they were losing nuance, friction and discovery. So we started to see people crave humanness -- they want things to be a little messy and complicated. We like the good ways the algorithm shapes our digital lives, but we want the next layer.

This was especially true for millennials. They were losing what social media had first been for them, which was a chance to see friends and people they actually know. Now they get endless reels from strangers, often about things they don't care about. It’s addicting, but not satisfying.

Marketing Daily: Your research shows 45% of consumers say they want to stand out from the crowd -- a stat up sharply from 36% in 2023. Are people truly craving individuality, or just realizing how conformist digital life has made them?

Kelter: It's a bit of both, and brands are feeling the frustration. Algorithms reward sameness. So when something viral happens, every brand chases it, and soon we’re all seeing the same thing. Consumers feel stuck on that feedback loop.

And yet there is an inherent desire to feel unique. We want to stand out. People crave standing out, but as soon as they get so many likes, everything gets dulled. Nothing stays unique for long.

Marketing Daily: So people want to game the algorithm?  

Kelter: People are trying to manipulate it more, to control it. They’re pushing back and looking for ways to co-create the mechanics of digital life. Pinterest, for example, has posted content encouraging users to “defy the algorithm.” Spotify is also offering more ways for people to change what they hear.

Marketing Daily: Even after scandals like Facebook/Cambridge Analytica and the realization that Russian trolls were influencing feeds, people aren’t quitting social media. What’s behind that contradiction?

Kelter: Yes, people see the good and the bad, and still use social media. They want connection, to be in touch with friends who are far away.

But it’s a false sense of intimacy. It feeds into another trend we see, which is the affection deficit. It goes hand in hand with online life: we’re losing opportunities for small talk. Everything's becoming automated.

That’s why people are moving away from dating apps. They’re joining run clubs, instead, or looking for group workout classes.

Marketing Daily: That ambivalence seems especially strong among younger users. What are you seeing from Gen Z and millennial parents?

Kelter: For example, 48% of Gen Z women acknowledge they mindlessly scroll. They’re still connected, but it isn’t doing them any good and they know it.

That’s why we see them using digital cameras and not phones at festivals now and listening to vinyl. They are not exactly removing themselves from it -- we’ve all seen too many digital detoxes fail. But they’re pulling back. Millennial parents are also going through a major reconsideration, often limiting their kids’ access. 

Marketing Daily: That’s a major shift, from “Isn’t social media cool?” to “How do I protect my kids from it?” What does your research say about those Gen Alpha kids, many of whom are already on Roblox?

Kelter: The oldest Alpha kids are 14 now, and fascinating. I expect they will so what all high schoolers do, which is turn away from their parents.