Brits prefer nicknames
Modern Brits have an average of three pet names and 56% of Gen Z admitted they prefer them to their real name, with 42% saying nicknames make them feel happy and 39% more loved when they are called by a different moniker.
And a huge 93% of those surveyed believe nicknames are a way of showing affection.
But the study of under 30s from Coca-Cola found pet name usage has changed over time, with Gen Z insisting they would never use the likes of 'treacle' (38%), 'snookums' (37%) , 'chick' (35%) , 'sugar' (31%), 'old man' (30%), or 'hon' (29%).
Instead, 'bro' (53%), 'mate' (44%), and 'bestie' (35%) are the most popular terms of endearment with the younger generation, while other modern nicknames in the top 20 include "bae" (28%), king (12%0, and shawty (11%).
Charlotte Butt, Senior Marketing Manager from Coca-Cola, said: 'Nicknames are more than just labels; they're a shorthand for shared history, inside jokes and personal connections.
"They reflect the unique relationships between individuals and the evolution of language within friendship groups, that's why we made sure to include terms of affection in our 'Share a Coke' range.'
To mark the findings, Coca-Cola have brought back 'Share a Coke', with the option for customers to create a can with any name of their choice by simply scanning the QR code on pack or instore from May 15th, to create a truly unique Coca-Cola pack.
And for the first time, Brits will be able to choose from a range of other nicknames and phrases around friendship, such as 'My Bestie', 'My Bae', 'My Mate', 'My Fam' and 'My Day One'.
Look for personalised Coca-Cola packs in store now.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
18 hours ago
- ABC News
The Facebook effect: How Mark Zuckerberg fashioned a generation in his own image - ABC Religion & Ethics
You can hear Samuel Cornell discuss the way social media is cultivating regressive expressions of masculinity with Waleed Aly and Scott Stephens on The Minefield. Mark Zuckerberg's ubiquitous 'platforms' have hosted the lives, loves and losses of an entire generation of people. Gen Z — which refers broadly to those born between 1997 and 2012 — have lived out their lives on the social media and internet platforms created by some of the world's wealthiest and most powerful people. People who attained their positions and status not through their emotional intelligence, their love of mankind or altruism, their desire to leave the world a better place, but through their insatiable desire for optimisation, 'connection', attention and power. Is it any wonder we have a generation of people that mirror their creator? People largely deficient in emotional intelligence, limited in person-to-person interaction yet comfortable in front of a camera, dismissive of empathy, inattentive to signs of human depth. A generation whose operative norms and online virtues have been instilled by Meta's 'Community Standards' — standards that are themselves changeable when it is politically expedient to do so. Not only is Silicon Valley shaping our sense of personhood, but Gen-Zers are even beginning to look like Zuck — what is now known as 'the Gen Z stare', the flat affect, deadpan expression, eyes glazed over. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg attending the inauguration of US President-elect Donald Trump in the US Capitol Rotunda on 20 January 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kenny Holston-Pool / Getty Images) This isn't the shell-shocked state, the long stare of a person who's seen awful horrors during war. It's a mirror of the affective style of a generation raised online and in front of screens. We know that young people have been profoundly shaped by their near constant exposure to social media and the online world, but this influence is perhaps even deeper than it appears. The world according to Zuck Mark Zuckerberg's view of the world —described in some detail by Sarah Wynn-Williams in her recent book Careless People — suggests a man who cares more for power and control than he does true connection between people. What he seeks is efficient, expedient and, crucially, frictionless communication. Not the kind of communication that requires nuance and subtlety of expression, but one that can be binary coded. Which is to say, robotic communication. Strategic communication. If we've learned nothing else from the last two decades, is that social media platforms reward strategy . Strategic presentation of the self. Strategic emotional display. Strategic posting. Strategic commenting and replying. Strategic adherence to whatever is trending. Zuckerberg has created a generation that excels in strategic 'authenticity', but which has little time for the kind of in-person communication that doesn't serve tactical means to an end. Zuckerberg's own idiosyncrasies, his trademark robotic style of communication, have been reproduced in the behaviour of young people now entering the real world. No longer coddled by the relative safety of school, the workplace demands more of them than social media has prepared them up for. That is, unless they can all aspire to the same role of manipulation, curation and control as their creator — such as striving to become an influencer, a true acolyte of the algorithm. Pick-and-mix identity Gen Z grew up inside social media rather than with it. It cradled them from a very young age and has been ever present in their lives. It's where they formed their identities. It's where they learned that personal identity, with its ever-increasing atomisation and grouping, was essential — particularly if they want to have a defined presence on social media. To be seen online, you had to define what, exactly, you are. To belong, you had to sort yourself into little niche groups. Social media made personal identity a matter of public branding. Instagram bios became identity resumes — without one, who are you? It would make others uneasy to not know. Zuckerberg's platform logic was built, fundamentally, on niche segmentation — that's the best way to direct advertisements your way. And who better to segment than the young, as early and quickly as possible for greater advertising revenue and effect. Social media has made personal identity a matter of public branding. (Photo illustration by Chris Jackson / Getty Images) This need to fit in with the algorithm isn't just about belonging. It's about survival in a space where visibility equals value. The platforms reward those who conform to their preferred categories. Be a brand, not a person. Be legible, not complex. You can shift identities, but only along recognised lines. Fluidity is fine (it's branded, after all), as long as it's easy to monetise. The result? A generation confident in self-presentation online, where they understand the rules and dynamics, but uncomfortable offline. Life is designed for the feed as opposed to real world interactions. The moral authority of Zuck's algorithm We don't know how the algorithms really work. There's probably nothing else in the world with such a gigantic influence on the lives of so many, and so many young people, that is as secretive and unaccountable. Even the people who are supposed to legislate and regulate these platforms don't understand them. Yet, young people have internalised the 'Community Standards' of the platforms they inhabit. Rules that are vague, erratic and inconsistent across contexts, but which carry much weight, nevertheless. For so many young users, these are the de jure limits to free speech and political expression. Therefore, these platforms have effectively become the moral arbiters of a generation — morals that don't promote introspection, or knowledge of self, so much as self-presentation. They tell users what they are by the constant feedback mechanism of the algorithms: honing and honing and honing until you can be optimised online no more. A cookie-cutter production of personas What kind of persona does an online environment such as this produce? Personas that are at once conflict averse and hyper-critical, emotionally dulled yet highly reactive online, socially engaged and attuned to online developments yet personally disconnected. Much like Zuckerberg's own low empathy, high control, distanced life of private jets and subservient employees, ever tinkering with code and obsessing about system performance, the people he's created concern themselves with metrics — likes, follows, shares — and rankings. Zuckerberg's ambition to get everyone into the metaverse by means of digital avatars that can communicate with AI agents and fashion an artificial life, is the antithesis of all that it means to be a human and fulfil human desires. Especially in adolescence, growth and development require friction and real social feedback. It's unclear where this will lead us. Perhaps Australia's social media minimum age regulation will be a positive start. We clearly need more than digital literacy. It seems there's enough focus on the digital as it is. Perhaps we need more focus on the physical, the tangible and material. The person to person. There doesn't always need to be 'an app for that'. Samuel Cornell is a PhD candidate at the University of New South Wales, researching public health, social media, and digital behaviour.
Perth Now
2 days ago
- Perth Now
David Beckham left with huge bald patch after DIY haircut blunder
David Beckham has been left with a glaring bald spot after a DIY haircut went wrong. The 50-year-old former England football captain had been attempting to recreate his iconic buzz cut at home when the clipper guard came loose mid-shave, removing a large chunk of hair from the top of his head, and the mishap was revealed in a video on Instagram posted by his wife Victoria. She said as he posed in the clip: 'It does not look good. I'm going to always be honest with you. It looks terrible.' David's haircut was intended as a tribute to his famous skinhead look, first debuted in a Premier League match against Leicester City in 2000. David recently said it remains his favourite look. Speaking to Gary Neville during an episode of The Overlap podcast, he said: 'I always like the skinhead. I always loved the skinhead, because it was easy and you didn't have to do anything with it.' The light-hearted clip of David's hair error comes amid deeper tensions within the Beckham family, with reports of an ongoing feud between their children. According to The Sun, Romeo Beckham, 22, and Cruz Beckham, 20, have blocked their elder brother Brooklyn Beckham, 26, on social media – a move which has reportedly widened the rift between them. Brooklyn, who married actor Nicola Peltz, 30, in 2022, is said to have been 'blindsided' by the apparent snub. A source told The Sun: 'Blocking or unfollowing someone on Instagram is like the Gen Z version of World War Three. It's a sad new low.' The insider added: 'Brooklyn has cut out his parents David and Victoria from his life and it's the same with Romeo and Cruz. 'Even when the family have reached out to Brooklyn they have been ignored. He's not had contact for months and it feels clear to them that he doesn't want to make amends.' The alleged Beckham feud is said to have been simmering for months. But while initial reports suggested Brooklyn and Nicola had unfollowed Romeo and Cruz, insiders close to Brooklyn claim that is not the case. A friend of Brooklyn's told The Sun: 'Brooklyn had no idea until he read about it online. It's possible Romeo and Cruz blocked them, which would make it appear as him no longer following the brothers. 'He and Nicola certainly didn't unfollow them or block them – they're as confused as anyone else. The first they heard about it was when it was being reported on.'
Courier-Mail
4 days ago
- Courier-Mail
Palace has 'meltdown' over leaked Charles funeral plans
Don't miss out on the headlines from Royals. Followed categories will be added to My News. Until the Queen Mother died at the shockingly premature age of 101-years-old, she was hailed as the embodiment of a uniquely British gin-laced, buck-up-chaps Blitz spirit. She epitomised 'keeping calm and carrying on', even in the face of dive bombing jerries and Châteauneuf-du-Pape served with fish. I'm betting that this week she would not be amused by the goings on inside Buckingham Palace after 'desperate royals' recently 'went to war' over someone inside the Palace whispering the 'most sensitive of royal secrets' to the press. X Learn More SUBSCRIBER ONLY And she would not be amused by the fact that the Palace is now battling leaks on multiple fronts after closely guarded details about not only the 'change of reign' but also about the King seemingly entering peace talks with a certain rudderless, isolated Californian duke. If Nelson had run this sort of far from watertight operation at Trafalgar, the Brits would be singing The Marseillaise at Villa Park today. This all started when the staunchly monarchist, Union Jack-waving Telegraph published an extraordinary scoop last month – the top, top, top secret details of King Charles' funeral planning. Codenamed Operation London Bridge, there's reportedly a several-hundred page playbook for what happens after Charles dies. Picture: Dylan Martinez –Codenamed Operation London Bridge (as all sovereigns' are) the reportedly several-hundred page Bible-like playbook for what happens after Charles dies will see eco elements at his funeral (recyclable fascinators maybe?), a reduced mourning period and the real clanger – the return of self-exiled, one-time TV producer Prince Harry to royal front ranks. This will mean in the first days and weeks of King William V's reign will see his long estranged brother, his wife Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and their children Prince Archie and Princess Lili, dramatically return to the UK and, temporarily at least, resume their place in the royal family. Now, let's be clear. The Telegraph piece makes pains to point out that 'There is no suggestion that the King's reign will not continue for many more years.' King Charles III and Queen Camilla at the State Banquet at Windsor Castle. Picture:(In fact, one of Charles' closest aides reportedly told the royal rota that His Majesty 'is living with cancer, continuing with treatment … and doing extremely well on it'.) The truth is, Their Majesties' funeral plans are something that are started decades in advance. The late Queen's was probably onto its third draft when colour TV was invented. Understandable then that even after the Telegraph got hold of Charles' Bridge planning, outwardly the Palace appeared sanguine, the only line in the story coming from them saw them 'caution against speculation'. You know what they say about appearances. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with their kids on a visit to Disneyland. Picture: Meghan Markle/Instagram Prince Harry reads to son Archie. Picture: Instagram/Meghan Now it has been claimed that this was far from the full picture; that behind the scenes, Charles' staffers were allegedly, and this is the technical term, having kittens over the leak. The revelation of His Majesty's funeral blueprint saw one of the King's top aides have a 'meltdown', according to a Daily Beast exclusive, before they launched 'a huge censorship operation to 'contain the spill'', which sounds like the sort of mucky mop up effort required after an oil tanker craters and takes out half the penguin population of the Puget Sound. Cor blimeby gov'nor. In fact this episode, the Beast's Tom Lachem writes, lays bare the 'iron fist in a velvet glove' of Palace operations. King Charles pictured on July 15, 2025 in London. Picture: Aaron Chown -The whole thing sounds less genteel sorts in a lesser drawing room writing charity press releases while listening to Brahms on the wireless and more North Korean Ministry of Information. The storm broke in late June when the Telegraph ran the piece entitled 'Prince Harry and Meghan at heart of King's funeral plans'. The Sussexes', deputy royal editor Victoria Ward reported, are at 'the heart of [the King's] funeral plans' and Charles 'is adamant that his youngest son take his rightful place at the centre of his family' when the sad day comes. This will see the duke 'walk side-by-side with his brother, by then the King … through the streets of central London' and both Harry and Meghan 'will be invited to … play a prominent role alongside the most senior royals during the funeral service.' Harry and Meghan 'will be invited to … play a prominent role alongside the most senior royals during the funeral service'. Picture: Ben Stansall –Given that the distance between Harry and the King probably can only be measured in light years – emotionally, psychologically, metaphysically – this was all astonishing stuff, concrete plans to bring the Sussexes in from the cold, even if temporarily. (Hard to see the new King William doing much fraternal forgiving or handing back of the Frogmore keys.) Making the Telegraph's bombshell all even more incredible – the Beast says the leaked Bridge details had 'originated from within Buckingham Palace's planning operation.' (Chatham House rulz okay?) Enter this story's star player, Tobyn Andreae, the King and Queen Camilla's communications head, who has dragged from the Palace shadows over the last and found his mug all over the Daily Mail. Andreae 'was very, very, unhappy' and 'multiple sources' told the Beast that Andreae 'had a meltdown' over the report. No other British outlets reported on the King's plans to bring the Sussexes back into the royal family, even if temporarily. Picture: Henry Nicholls/AFP After the Telegraph story came out, 'courtiers began an extraordinary operation,' the Beast reports, to try and stop all the other UK newspapers also covering the leaked Bridge revelations. As the Beast points out, this appears to have worked. No other British outlets reported on the King's plans to bring the Sussexes back into the royal family, even if temporarily. Then, a couple of weeks later, came Andreae's starring moment, finding his face splashed all over the Daily Mail. Somehow the paper managed to have a paparazzo in place to record a 'peace summit' involving the spin doctor and two of the Sussexes' top aides, including their communications head and head of household Meredith Maines. Even though the trio just had 'casual drinks,' per the Mail, this meeting was the biggest step towards patching things up between London and Montecito that we have seen in years. What next? The formal exchange of gift baskets? King Charles with his son Prince Harry in 2019. Picture: Samir Hussein/WireImage Between the Bridge details being fed to the media and, you'd have to guess, someone tipping off the Mail (the Sussexes were reportedly 'frustrated' over the secret meeting being made public), Andreae is really not having a crash hot time of it right now. Lips would seem to be decidedly loose right now and all this manoeuvring and planning being splashed all over the internet and the media can hardly be welcomed by the 'iron fisted' Palace now can it? At this rate someone will be blabbing about Queen Camilla's regular Nandos order tout suite. Let me leave you with the most useful but wonderful bit of royal trivia I have ever picked up. If The Marseillaise had ended up as the British national anthem then, handily, the Queen Mother could reportedly play it on the mouth organ. Simply brilliant. Daniela Elser is a writer, editor and commentator with more than 15 years' experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles. Originally published as Palace's 'meltdown' over leaked Charles funeral plans
