Table of Contents
Written by : Jene Archacki |
Current |
Write a comment |
Write a comment
many people today instinctively recoil from the concept of a brand the word brand brings with it some disturbing associations heartless commercialism crushing uniformity blandness and a dumbed-down experience there are plenty of bad brands around so it's understandable that blame gets attached to the whole underlying notion of brand itself it becomes tempting to suppose that ideally we live in a world that was entirely unbranded but in fact the idea of a brand is a really important one a good economy needs good brands essentially a brand is a constellation of qualities it's a personality in the material realm the bad associations around brand spring from the way that often the personality feels crude annoying or stupid Tommy Hilfiger projects a vision of life in which group sports of central and self doubt has little glamour that can be a pity consider by contrast how in the early part of the 20th century Virginia Woolf and her family and friends created a brand known today as Bloomsbury that stressed the centrality of conversation flowers flowing garments and sexual experimentation a brand where groups sports and cheeriness had very little glamour but a brand doesn't only symbolize a set of ideas it's about standardizing and reproducing them again that can sound depressing but only because we're thinking of some pretty uninspiring things being repeated in the 16th century the Italian architect Andrea Palladio worked out some basic designs for villas churches and public buildings in the classical style as his ideas spread they were branded and universalized they were over the centuries taken up all over the world in the u.s. Thomas Jefferson bought big into the Palladian brand his own house Monticello in the University of Virginia are key examples of franchise architecture just as much as is the design for McDonald's restaurants the key issue isn't free creativity versus the cold hand of the brand rather it's between a good wonderful inspiring brand like Palladio and less impressive burger brands brands helped to overcome the unreliability of individuals the brand offers the template and the rules so that you don't need to be a genius to bring about something of genius which is very good news because there are very few geniuses around and we don't want good things to have to depend on such a rare phenomenon most brands have logos the logo is a visual cue that immediately focuses on lines on particular qualities that we can expect of the location or object that carries it again logos come in four great criticism they seem to be everywhere and to ruin the skyline but it isn't a logo that's the problem once again it's the underlying quality that the logo is representing for many the Christian Lamb is a deeply cheering logo ideally the aim shouldn't be to eliminate brands the big goal should be to elevate the concept of a brand we actually need and hugely benefit from good things being developed as brands we need more good things to shift from being as they are now cottage industries to being global brands for example it's a great pity that the British psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott who died in 1971 remains just one individual who gave birth to a few books and lectures that colored the education of present-day psychoanalysts rather than as should have happened a brand that would outlive him complete with centers films logos perhaps restaurants and a clear ideology to communicate to the world the amoral approach to economics and business says that a good brand is simply a brand that's strong and popular it doesn't matter very much what the content of the brand happens to be by this way of thinking Krispy Kreme is a great brand because of its global success in getting people to eat flavored fattening Donuts but we should really be asking a different question which is what makes a brand admirable in broad human terms what makes it good in a sense of contributing to human flourishing and helping us to lead the best lives we can a good brand is one that's built around a set of genuine virtues we need a lot more of those brands brands invite the recognition that great things are not usually done by individuals acting in heroic isolation at some point every good idea every important insight should go through the process of becoming a brand because this just means that it would widen its power in the world and other people can join in the world is in great need of better brands you
Thanks for your comment Lyndon Buzzard, have a nice day.
- Jene Archacki, Staff Member
coke is just soda tylenol just acetaminophen and levi's are just genes yet consumers go out of their way to select these specific brands over others an economist would say how is this possible that a rational consumer would be willing to pay more for exactly the same thing we love to think about ourselves as rational that's not how it works a very famous study done by colleagues at duke university it flashed either the apple logo or the ibm logo to two randomized groups of participants the study found that after being subliminally exposed to the apple logo compared to when you've been exposed to the ibm logo participants performed better on creative tasks and the argument is that apple has been telling you this story over and over again that apple is the brand for hip cool fun creative people this is the true power of brands they can influence our behavior in ways that extend way beyond the point of sale so to what degree can the influence of brands wreak havoc on our ability to make rational spending decisions this is your brain on money this is americus reid he studies identity and marketing at the university of pennsylvania when i make choices about different brands i'm choosing to create an identity when i put that shirt on when i put those shoes on those jeans that have someone is going to form an impression about what i'm about so if i'm choosing nike over under armour i'm choosing a kind of different way to express affiliation with sport the nike thing is about performance the under armour thing is about the underdog i have to choose which of these different conceptual pathways is most consistent with where i am in my life and once a consumer makes that choice their relationship with a brand can deepen to the point where they identify with the brand like family and once you identify with a brand it can shape the way you behave and it's really interesting because they will also if someone talks bad about that product brand or service they will be the first to go out and defend why because an attack on the brand is an attack on themselves michael platt is a professor of neuroscience marketing and psychology whose research demonstrates how our perception of brands influences our decisions there's an idea in marketing which is that we relate to brands in the same way we relate to people it's like i love this brand or i hate this brand of course what people say right can often be different from what's really going on in their heads so we thought well why don't we just ask the brain directly michael and his team observed the brains of iphone users and samsung galaxy users with an mri machine while they heard good bad and neutral news about apple and samsung apple customers showed a brain empathy response toward apple that was exactly what you'd see in the way you would respond to somebody in your own family strangely samsung users didn't have any positive or negative responses when good or bad news was released about their brand the only evidence that samsung users showed was reverse empathy for apple news meaning if the apple headline was negative their brain reflected a positive response you know it really shows us that apple has completely defined the market here samsung customers it seems from their brain data are only buying samsung because they hate apple the kicker the samsung users didn't report feeling the results that mris showed what was happening in their brains and what they reported feeling towards apple and samsung were totally different most people just don't realize that they are subconsciously choosing brands because those brands have some kind of self-expressive value you can see there's a lot of power here in terms of shaping consumers decisions as we learn more and more about that we have to think much more deeply about the ethical legal and societal implications of doing that so as consumers what can we do to make informed choices well the best thing we can do is be aware of the influence that brands hold i think it's important to always pause and think a little bit about okay why am i buying this product and like it or not brands aren't going anywhere i've heard lots of people push back and say that i'm not into brands i take a very different view they're not doing anything any different than what someone who affiliates with a brand is doing they have a brand it's just an anti-brand brand i think about what is it i've learned about identity over time i think a lot of it has to do with the fundamental need that we as humans have to have support systems perhaps it was the church it was the community it was these other institutions that existed now brands have stepped in as pillars of our identity so i'm very much motivated to see that in that positive light
Thanks EpherywerravE0 your participation is very much appreciated
- Jene Archacki
About the author
I've studied canon law at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee and I am an expert in philosophy of music. I usually feel accepted. My previous job was sportswriter (journalist) I held this position for 9 years, I love talking about wikipedia editing and learn an instrument. Huge fan of Henry Winkler I practice karate and collect non-sports trading cards.
Try Not to laugh !
Joke resides here...