[grid::brand] The Emergence of Corporate Subjectivities
Some random thoughts on the growth of branding in general and on the Web, as part of the grid blogging project.
1. The value of individual objects within a specific market class (
compact SUVs,
entry-level DVD players,
Windows-compatible computers) cannot easily be differentiated based on functional utility. What's the inherent (unlearned) difference between an
Isuzu Rodeo and a
Honda Passport? Between
Coke and Pepsi?
The prevalence of
buyer's guides is not merely due to the growing complexity of products; it comes partially from our inability to see any tangible difference between groups of products in a class. We want someone to give us a reason to make a "sound" decision. In most cases, though, it's a toss-up.
2. Multinational corporations increasingly rely on their brand for identity, their corporate subjectivity, so to speak:
Ford,
McDonalds,
Guinness,
Nike.
The brand identifies itself with specific products so that the perceived utility value of the products shifts to the brand itself.
3. The disappearance of functional utility between specific products across brands in a class becomes covered over by the increasing visibility of brand-as-value. For example, Nike, as a brand ID, becomes the cornerstone of corporate subjectivity, beyond the identifiable value of specific, concrete, usable products. The
visibility of the Nike logo in general becomes valuable on its own in many situations such as sporting events.
4. Although capitalism has always included "trusted" or "valued" corporations or State-approved entities (contemporary intellectual property emerged from the
guilds and States approving very limited-term monopolies in specific product lines and/or markets), brands today are marketed almost completely in the absence of specific products.
1. The value of individual objects within a specific market class (
compact SUVs,
entry-level DVD players,
Windows-compatible computers) cannot easily be differentiated based on functional utility. What's the inherent (unlearned) difference between an
Isuzu Rodeo and a
Honda Passport? Between
Coke and Pepsi?
The prevalence of
buyer's guides is not merely due to the growing complexity of products; it comes partially from our inability to see any tangible difference between groups of products in a class. We want someone to give us a reason to make a "sound" decision. In most cases, though, it's a toss-up.
2. Multinational corporations increasingly rely on their brand for identity, their corporate subjectivity, so to speak:
Ford,
McDonalds,
Guinness,
Nike.
The brand identifies itself with specific products so that the perceived utility value of the products shifts to the brand itself.
3. The disappearance of functional utility between specific products across brands in a class becomes covered over by the increasing visibility of brand-as-value. For example, Nike, as a brand ID, becomes the cornerstone of corporate subjectivity, beyond the identifiable value of specific, concrete, usable products. The
visibility of the Nike logo in general becomes valuable on its own in many situations such as sporting events.
4. Although capitalism has always included "trusted" or "valued" corporations or State-approved entities (contemporary intellectual property emerged from the
guilds and States approving very limited-term monopolies in specific product lines and/or markets), brands today are marketed almost completely in the absence of specific products.
5. Individual brand names, in an advertising driven (postmodern) economy,
tend to trade in lifestyles, personal images, and imaginary relations in which consumers insert themselves. Purchasing the product "sutures" the consumer into that image, albeit in an unsatisfactory way. The cycle begins again. Advertising shifts from information about a product to information about a proffered lifestyle.
From
Advertising Age:
BUENOS AIRES (AdAge.com) -- In a curious marketing effort combining old-time big-top hokum with high-tech consumer products, Philips Electronics is about to launch the Philips Electronic Circus on a 12-city tour of South America.
Among other things, the Philips circus includes three tents (top), a digital female target for the knife thrower (middle) and a live magician who interacts with a digital assistant.
Philips Electronic Circus on a 12-city tour of South America.
It is literally a three-ring circus, with a ringmaster, knife-thrower, magician, acrobats, midgets and wild animals. Some are living, breathing people in costume and others are digital video images playing on the Philips equipment that is the real star of the show.
6. The growth in symbolic value of brands, as it becomes divorced from specific products or markets, requires control over symbols rather than simply markets. Logos and brands must
be unique
7. The Web continues the collapse of utility as value in the form of domain names, a high-profile piece of real estate in the battle for mindshare. Because brands are no longer linked firmly to specific types of products, on the World Wide Web, a brand must be able to claim a
universal symbolic value.
From
Wired:
Take the case of Uzi Nissan. This North Carolina-based software developer -- born with the brand names of those two wholly American lifestyle products, guns and cars -- has been operating his two-employee business through awebsite he set up in 1994. There's a car company, however, that has its eye on his prize.
The Nissan v. Nissan lawsuit -- picture the acrimonious custody battle of Kramer vs. Kramer, but without the cute kid -- is now in the "discovery" phase, awaiting this month's decision on an appeal over a preliminaryinjunction issued and affirmed last March by the U.S. Ninth District Court.
8. The Global Village: One world = one market.
Posted by johndan at December 1, 2003 11:51 AM
| TrackBack