top of page

How MAD lost its brand core...

I was the first reader on the cover of MAD magazine.

Today I know: That should never have happened .


But let's start from the beginning.


I was a die-hard MAD fan. And anyone who knows MAD knows: This satirical magazine took nothing and no one seriously. Least of all its readership.

And anyone who read MAD back then knows: the letters to the editor section was one of the best parts! Not because we readers got answers, but because we were publicly ridiculed. And we loved it!


So when, in 1993, at the age of 14, I cheekily suggested in a letter to the editor that they should print MYSELF on the cover instead of always this “Alfred E. Neumann”, I naturally expected a biting, funny – and in the best case public – rejection in the magazine.


But no, the unbelievable happened:

I ended up on the cover of MAD No. 286 😱 and was thus the first reader on a MAD magazine.


I was incredibly proud! And at the same time , confused. Because something felt wrong. I didn't recognize "my" MAD anymore. Why was I suddenly being taken seriously?!


And it continued: More readers were to be included in the print edition. I had started an avalanche.


Today I know:


This was no joke.

This was a breach of trust:

MAD had betrayed its core brand values.


The (perceived) core of the brand was always clear: MAD doesn't take anything or anyone seriously. Or, as they so aptly put it: "What, me worry?"


A question for those who had read MAD: Do you know who the central figure behind the German MAD was?


It was the legendary Herbert Feuerstein (1937–2020).


From issue 33 to 276, he served as Editor-in-Chief of MAD Germany and left a lasting mark on the magazine — translating the US content by Don Martin & Co., curating German cartoonists and writers, and setting the tone and attitude of German MAD.


When he left MAD in 1992, his subtle humor disappeared – and apparently so did the brand's internal guidelines.


Ten issues later, they gave up their sacred cow, the cover, and printed me on it. Oh dear.


What can brands learn from this today?


When key figures leave a company and have no adequate successors, the brand is put to a tough test.


In times of necessary change, the brand must recognize: What do people value about the brand? What belongs to the brand's core and must absolutely remain as it is?


Many brands fail at this and lose strength due to inconsistency at their core.

Or to put it another way:

Some brands no longer have the courage to simply continue saying "What, me worry?".


For those who would like to learn more about the background of MAD, here are the sources I used for my research:


 

 
 
bottom of page