Meta, Block, Alphabet: Why some companies outgrow their old names

When tech becomes Big Tech, sometimes the names feel too small.

Block's logo on a teal background.

What do you do when your company becomes many companies? You might have to rebrand.

Image: Block

What’s in a name? For tech companies, quite a lot.

Most companies in tech are named for their first product, whether it’s a social network, a shopping website, a search engine or a messaging service. But as big tech companies grow, their ambitions tend to sprawl, and their founding names often can’t keep up. So in recent years, tech giants like Meta, Block and Alphabet shifted from the names of their flagship products to something all-encompassing. But companies taking on a sleek new name isn’t just a marketing play. Brands often take new names to create distance between themselves and their flagship product.

“When one brand is too big a part of your main product, like Facebook, it becomes dangerous,” said Fabian Geyrhalter, principal at branding consultancy Finien. “If you have five products, and you name your main brand after one product, you might end up having a difficulty when that one product gets bad press.”

Take Meta: As the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and several other subsidiaries, the social media behemoth may have taken a new name to signal its metaverse ambitions both to the world and to its employees, but also to separate itself and its other products from any bad blowback that one may get (and we all know Facebook can get quite a bit of bad press).

Brentos Fernandez, partner and head of creative at brand-focused venture capital firm Listen, called this the “house of brands” strategy. Alphabet is the classic example: It became the umbrella for dozens of other properties when Larry Page and Sergey Brin changed the company’s name from Google in 2015. A similar situation occurred with travel technology company Bookings Holdings, formerly known as The Priceline Group. These companies’ iconic (and previously eponymous) products, like Google, Facebook and Priceline, still exist. Now, they’re just no longer the main event.

“Tech, in particular, is prone to this recalibration as their product changes with innovations in computing and user needs,” Fernandez said in an email. “Meta and Block are the latest examples of companies looking to signal a shift in product strategy. Both of which have grown beyond their initial product into a broad suite of products.”

Shorter names in particular are also a status symbol often reserved for tech giants looking to make their brands memorable. And as companies have started to grow out of what Fernandez calls their “word smash era,” startups naming themselves things like “thisbook and that-ly” will lose popularity, he said. Adding on an interesting top-level domain to a url, such as Block and Alphabet’s websites ending in “.xyz,” also gives a tech company some clout.

“It’s easy to score a domain like,” Fernandez said. “Shorter names are desirable as they can be easier to tap into your browser. A common short word is often more of a luxury for large tech companies who have the cash on hand to purchase those short URLs.”

New names represent a company’s aspirations, said Geyrhalter. Facebook likely chose to take on Meta as the company makes it a goal to practically be synonymous with the emerging metaverse. Even Square becoming Block makes sense as Jack Dorsey, in his newly full-time role as CEO, forges ahead with ambition of taking the crypto world by storm. Fernandez said name changes are a common occurrence in tech because of the constantly evolving nature of the industry.

“You usually want to change your name because your old name just did not grow with the new product,” Geyrhalter said. “The product vision and the brand vision need to align.”

Though new names sometimes come from mergers and acquisitions, such as Warner Bros. Discovery, they can also represent a change in direction, such as new product offerings or a change in business strategy. In 2013, Research in Motion rebranded as BlackBerry amid the release of a new phone, to which the company’s then-CEO Thorsten Heins said: "We have reinvented the company, and we want to represent this in our brand.” And Netflix spun off its video-rental service from its streaming business in 2011, naming it Qwikster. (That one didn’t go so well.)

“Rebranding, at its core, is a chance to create news, excitement, sometimes public bewilderment,” Fernandez said. “When handled correctly, it is a realignment of your promise to the consumer. It is the chance to get it right. It can re-introduce a company to the world, and with the right kit of parts, help users connect more emotionally with a company.”

Of course, sometimes it’s much simpler than that: Amazon is only called Amazon because people kept confusing “Cadabra,” its original name, with the word “cadaver.” Jeff Bezos reportedly named the company Amazon after the world's largest river, as he then had the goal of creating the world's largest bookstore. Now, it’s just the world's largest store, period.

Though it may not seem like anything has changed with Meta or Block, their new names signify that change is on the horizon. New names give companies distance from their first ideas, giving them the opportunity to reinvent themselves and the space to try new things. As sleek names and holding companies gain popularity, new names and new strategies might be in the cards for other tech giants.

Update: This story has been updated to more accurately describe Listen’s status as a VC firm. Updated Dec. 7.


A pro-China disinformation campaign is targeting rare earth miners

It’s uncommon for cyber criminals to target private industry. But a new operation has cast doubt on miners looking to gain a foothold in the West in an apparent attempt to protect China’s upper hand in a market that has become increasingly vital.

It is very uncommon for coordinated disinformation operations to target private industry, rather than governments or civil society, a cybersecurity expert says.

Photo: Goh Seng Chong/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Just when we thought the renewable energy supply chains couldn’t get more fraught, a sophisticated disinformation campaign has taken to social media to further complicate things.

Known as Dragonbridge, the campaign has existed for at least three years, but in the last few months it has shifted its focus to target several mining companies “with negative messaging in response to potential or planned rare earths production activities.” It was initially uncovered by cybersecurity firm Mandiant and peddles narratives in the Chinese interest via its network of thousands of fake social media accounts.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (

Some of the most astounding tech-enabled advances of the next decade, from cutting-edge medical research to urban traffic control and factory floor optimization, will be enabled by a device often smaller than a thumbnail: the memory chip.

While vast amounts of data are created, stored and processed every moment — by some estimates, 2.5 quintillion bytes daily — the insights in that code are unlocked by the memory chips that hold it and transfer it. “Memory will propel the next 10 years into the most transformative years in human history,” said Sanjay Mehrotra, president and CEO of Micron Technology.

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.

Ripple’s CEO threatens to leave the US if it loses SEC case

CEO Brad Garlinghouse said a few countries have reached out to Ripple about relocating.

"There's no doubt that if the SEC doesn't win their case against us that that is good for crypto in the United States,” Brad Garlinghouse told Protocol.

Photo: Stephen McCarthy/Sportsfile for Collision via Getty Images

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said the crypto company will move to another country if it loses in its legal battle with the SEC.

Garlinghouse said he’s confident that Ripple will prevail against the federal regulator, which accused the company of failing to register roughly $1.4 billion in XRP tokens as securities.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


The Supreme Court’s EPA ruling is bad news for tech regulation, too

The justices just gave themselves a lot of discretion to smack down agency rules.

The ruling could also endanger work on competition issues by the FTC and net neutrality by the FCC.

Photo: Geoff Livingston/Getty Images

The Supreme Court’s decision last week gutting the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions didn’t just signal the conservative justices’ dislike of the Clean Air Act at a moment of climate crisis. It also served as a warning for anyone that would like to see more regulation of Big Tech.

At the heart of Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision in West Virginia v. EPA was a codification of the “major questions doctrine,” which, he wrote, requires “clear congressional authorization” when agencies want to regulate on areas of great “economic and political significance.”

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.


Microsoft and Google are still using emotion AI, but with limits

Microsoft said accessibility goals overrode problems with emotion recognition and Google offers off-the-shelf emotion recognition technology amid growing concern over the controversial AI.

Emotion recognition is a well-established field of computer vision research; however, AI-based technologies used in an attempt to assess people’s emotional states have moved beyond the research phase.

Photo: Microsoft

Microsoft said last month it would no longer provide general use of an AI-based cloud software feature used to infer people’s emotions. However, despite its own admission that emotion recognition technology creates “risks,” it turns out the company will retain its emotion recognition capability in an app used by people with vision loss.

In fact, amid growing concerns over development and use of controversial emotion recognition in everyday software, both Microsoft and Google continue to incorporate the AI-based features in their products.

“The Seeing AI person channel enables you to recognize people and to get a description of them, including an estimate of their age and also their emotion,” said Saqib Shaikh, a software engineering manager and project lead for Seeing AI at Microsoft who helped build the app, in a tutorial about the product in a 2017 Microsoft video.

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories