����

One week after Cracker Barrel unveiled a new logo—part of a reported $700 million investment into updates for the restaurant chain—the company announced it will revert back to its old branding.

And while the political overtones that drove such an intensive backlash against the company are a more contemporary feature of our culture, Morgan Young said the brand likely made the same error Coca-Cola committed in a short-lived rebrand in the 1980s.

“I’m sure Cracker Barrel did the research, ran focus groups and asked good questions—one of them being, do you like this logo better?” said Young, an associate teaching professor of advertising at the College of Communication, Media, Design and Information. “What Coca-Cola didn’t do, and perhaps Cracker Barrel didn’t do, as well, was ask the next question, which would be, ‘How do you feel about the brand as an identity to you?’ Because the issue with New Coke wasn’t the flavor, it was doing away with an iconic brand that meant so much to people.”

Young (Hist’94) has never worked on the Cracker Barrel brand, but has decades of experience, both in running his own agency, Young Ideas, and as a former senior vice president and creative director at Goddard Claussen. So, he has a keen eye for what happens when a brand misses the mark.

In trying to grow its customer base, Cracker Barrel alienated its dedicated fans by not only drastically simplifying the logo, but changing the look and feel of some of its restaurants to get away from its farmhouse aesthetic.

“Cracker Barrel likely didn’t understand that their fanbase—likely an older group of customers—doesn’t want a change,” Young said. “We are in a moment of rapid innovation, and if you are older, change is not necessarily a good thing—because it can mean being left behind. And I think that’s what’s happening here.”

In the undergraduate classes he teaches, Young asks his students what their most admired brands are. In each class, Nike and Patagonia top the list, and it’s not because of the clothes they sell.

“They feel Nike has a set of values they stand by. Same with Patagonia, which calls itself an environment-first company,” Young said. “I think in 2025, you can’t hide from your values as a company. Nike and Patagonia have built a devoted fanbase by leaning into those values, which inspires loyalty among customers and help them grow.”

So, in a hyperpolarized moment—when a new logo sets off a political firestorm that even the president of the country feels inclined to weigh in on—what is the lesson for advertising and branding professionals? Young shared some thoughts he brings to the classroom:

• Don’t be afraid to take chances. “If you’re always in the backseat, waiting for someone else to lead, you’ll always be Pepsi,” Young said. “In my agency days, we were always about change, trying to help brands stay with the times. That’s how you succeed.”
• Know your audience. You can’t sell to everyone—and when you try, you invite backlash like Cracker Barrel is going through, or like Bud Lite a couple years back. “Think about your target audience and how to communicate with them effectively, and bond with them,” he said.
• Question yourself. Young had several campaigns he was quite proud of die in focus groups. “When I would do anything that harkened back to the past, we would have focus group members—especially with Black audiences, and especially women—say, ‘Those 1950s Americana themes might look good to you, but they bring up bad feelings for me. You have a different history than I do,’” Young said. “And they were right.”

Ultimately, the swirling controversy around Cracker Barrel’s re-rebrand is unlikely to cost the chain in the long term, Young said. But it is a reminder—especially in the digital age, where social media can both burnish and tarnish a brand’s bona fides—that companies have less control than ever over their value and meaning.

“We don’t determine a brand—the consumer does,” Young said. “Just ask Cracker Barrel.”��

Joe Arney covers research and general news for the college.��