“What is the relationship between branding and
The Consumer Self?”
Since the early 19th century, branding
has developed into almost every product, service, or company on the planet.
This rapid increase has speculated various questions on why branding exists,
what it can do to benefit a company, and what relationship it has with the
consumers. To distinguish a product or business with a symbol and a name, is
similar to the name of a human being, it creates a reference which can spread their
acknowledgement. An individuals given name can make them significant,
identified and systematic. Similar terms apply when creating a brand, it can
establish an identity within a product which can form bonds with the consumer.
It can also become organizable within the vast array of similar competitor
products, allowing the customer to search for, and locate their trusted brand.
This essay plans to explore all of the elements which compose a brand and the
effects which it poses on any given consumer.
In the book ‘Klein, N. (1999) No Logo,
Canada: Knopf Canada, Picador’, the author is trying to summarize her negative emotions on the subject of
branding by exploring her own personal experiences and memory's. She does this
very effectively in an informal manor which makes the read more personal and
chatty towards the reader. Her past experiences are explained very clearly,
immersing the audience into the authors shoes very effectively and helping them
relate to the authors point of view.
Naomi describes that in her lifetime, she has
viewed culture being manipulated by branding more as the years have gone by.
The authors tone of voice suggests that she is very bias in a negative way
towards the idea of branding. She believes that it is suffocating real forms of
culture such as artwork, sculpture and dance. But then the idea can be argued,
who says branding hasn't become a vital part of modern culture? Who says that
an Adidas shoe isn't a piece of artwork in our modern day and age? Just because
branding is a new form of culture doesn't mean that it is bad however, the
authors biased point of view suggests that she feels that it is pushing other
forms of culture to the sidelines. Now, there is hardly anything which isn't
branded, even down to online websites such as YouTube which is a platform for
sharing culture as a whole. Naomi wants to go back to a simpler time where
people weren't judged by the branding which they wore. This can be analyzed
from this quote
'Tommy Hilfiger, who has managed to pioneer a
clothing style that transforms its faithful adherents into walking, talking,
life-sized Tommy dolls, mummified in fully branded Tommy worlds.' (Klein 1999)
Throughout the book, Naomi uses negative
metaphors and adjectives such as 'mummified' in order to explain the negative
implications which consumerism has on society. She dislikes the way which
branding now informs language, attitude and division between groups of people.
In some cases, It could be interpreted as new form of racism where people are
discriminated against because of the branding they wear.
This new form of racism can be related through
into ‘Lloyd
Morgan, C. (1999) Logo, Identity, Brand, Culture, London: Roto-Vision’ which depicts the origins of
brand wear to hold a correlation associated with the Jews and concentration camps
in the second world war. Wearing the sign relates to
' establish rights or even to act as a form of
public warning, as in the physical branding of criminals or the Nazis
deliberate humiliation of the Jews through the wearing of the Star of David'. (Lloyd
Morgan 1999)
This statement underpins the strength of branding
which is often overlooked by society as being just a commodity. This
representation of the Star was implemented as a bilingual symbol which could be
understood by English, German, Polish and any other language in the war to
universally dehumanize a group of people. At multiple times throughout history,
branding has grouped people and divided them into different life threatening
categories, another representation which has relevance to this issue is the 'Bloods
and Cripps' where the colours of an outfit became the branding and identity
itself. When branding is thought of, it is often just associated with just the
symbol however, it is what defines a company or a group of people as a whole. A
corporate identity is formed throughout functions such as symbol, uniforms,
colour and even hand signs.
There is the counter argument that the branding
of the star was not a underlining factor in the humiliation of the Jews and
that things would have been the same with or without it however, the Nazis
implemented the star onto the clothes of the Jews for symbolic and
organizational purposes. It was meant to segregate the Jews from society and
mock what they believed in. This in turn made this branding a strong factor in
easily discriminating against the Jews and was intended to make the Jewish
people ashamed of their religion and not want to wear their symbol with pride.
The scheme then helped successfully administer the Jewish people to the
concentration camps.
The 'Lebron James Shoes' which Nike produce are a
perfect example of how branding is still a significant factor in the
segregation of cultures, races, genders and religions in todays modern
environment. The power of stereotypical advertising has again created barriers
between races, just like the Star of David did in World War 2, this time however,
they are more subtle. These shoes create a symbol of black culture using
advertising which is restricted and purely aimed at black people as the target
audience. In many cases, this has lead to bullying of other ethnic groups if
they wear these shoes and further creates the impediment of diverse cultures.
To seek the prospect of how a brand can own a specific group of people, the
terminology and history of branding must be explored. Before branding in
clothing, cars and companies, there was the branding of animals which farmers
used to determine who owned a specific group of sheep or cattle. This was manly
done with paint, symbol or a branding iron so that the ownership of the herd
can be recognized by other farmers.
This idea has been developed into clothing and
directly relates to the theory that a brand can own a group of people much like
a farmer owns a group of sheep. Ironically, this can define humans who follow
fashion trends as sheep which just follow the heard and have no real individuality.
To this day, people who purchase an item of clothing with a brand believe that
they own that brand however, when observed from this perspective, is it the
brand who in fact owns them? In a way, even though the consumer has bought the
product, the product has previously convinced the customer into purchasing
their brand by using marketing techniques and advertising. The typography of
the image has also been targeted by using similar connotations of black family
TV shows such as ‘The Cosby’s’. The similarity in the font tries to
subconsciously reach out to the black community who may notice the familiar
font without even realizing.
The book ‘Olins, W. (2003) On Brand,
London : Thames & Hudson.’ takes a more neutral stand point on the issue by exploring the possibilities
of branding in charity and politics, as well as contradicting the notion that
all of the conglomerate groups are money exploiting companies. The author
directly calls out to Naomi Klein’s book ‘No Logo’ for overlooking the fact
that
‘Nobody would seriously suggest that Oxfam, Save
the Children, the WWF or the Elizabeth Taylor Aids Foundation are sullied
because they successfully use all the techniques of branding to go about their
business.’ (Olins 2003)
This counter argues that branding and logos can
be used in a positive and constructive manor when utilized correctly. In a
charity organization, they can be used as a symbol to represent a link between
the consumer, the organization and the person in need of aid. Having a
relationship or status within a charitable group can often be a somewhat
unobservable brand but nether the less can make people feel like part of a
community that is helping. Not being grouped with a visible brand mark almost
implies that the consumer owns the brand, they have the free will to share
their brand status with other people or to keep the brand private. When
comparing this to the likes of Tommy Hilfiger or even Austin Martin, it seems
as though consumers are more interested in using brands to boast about their
wealth or financial status, rather than their humanitarian acts of kindness.
After all, there aren’t Oxfam or Save the Children cars driving on the roads.
Later on in his book, Wally Olins explores the notion
of where brands materialize from, along with how they reach out to the
consumer. The author lists a few simple steps which he believes all commercial
brands use as a formula for success in the brand identity of their product,
‘ (i) This product is better because it contains
x (secret, magic, new, miracle): the ingredient that will make a radical
difference to your life.
(ii) If (when) you use it, your home will look
more beautiful, or your food will taste better, or your clothes will be
brighter and whiter, or you yourself will look even more glamorous than ever
before.’ (Olins 2003)
These statements have similarity’s with the work
of the neurologist Sigmund Freud who believed that advertising our human
desires and instincts can subconsciously persuade a consumer to buy into a
brand. By selling an emotion of importance or desirability with the opposite
sex for example, a company can sell the illusion of happiness within their
brand identity. This relationship between the consumer, and the brand selling
an emotion or desire, can create a false sense of personal identity.
Corporations can use propaganda and media to manipulate this false identity
into a product, the Lynx brand for example, has created a relationship between
their product, and the ideology to be sexually desired. This promise is what
draws a targeted audience towards the brand and can start to form the barriers
of what type of person is going to be segregated into the brands identity. As
can be seen from the advertisement below, the company has used a common hairy
undesirable man to create a relationship between the majority of the population
of males, and their brand. In order to create a relationship with their target
audience, they have used a relatable figure which engages with many of the
accolades which a common man holds. They sell the idea of desirability in their
brand identity which promises the common man that all women will suddenly find
them attractive. This is obviously not the case however it solidifies some of
Sigmund Freud’s key principles on the theory of selling human desires within a
product. These elements of advertising and propaganda are also backed up in ‘Packard, V. (1957)
The Hidden Persuaders, America : Pelican Books’ where
the author describes eight psychological laws that corporations use to
manipulate their desired audience. These eight laws are said to be all of the
desires that human beings hold and by promising these needs into a product, a
consumer’s mind can be manipulated into wanting the intended product.
Once these eight laws are identified and applied
to a subject, almost anything can be sold and portrayed towards its desired audience.
A strong example for this is the way in which the brand ‘Timberland’ combined
the compelling needs of love objects and a sense of power in order to direct
their work boots towards a whole new target audience. By integrating a powerful
object such as work boots within the fashion industry, they managed to open up
their product to a whole new audience within the female fashion world.
Moving onto broader examples of branding, Wally
Olins suggests that countries use patriotic branding techniques in order to
bestow a sense of national identity within their products. He speculates that
‘nationality is some kind of seal of quality.
Nobody in the right mind would buy Italian whisky or for that matter Scottish
olive oil.’ (Olins 2003)
This stereotypical standpoint raises the issues
of the placebo effect, are we tricked into believing that the Scottish whisky
tastes better just because it is Scottish? Never the less, this branding
technique can be seen utilized in companies all over the world, a prime example
of this is the German company which now owns the Rolls Royce franchise. They
have preserved the British nationality of the brand as the key marketing
technique of their advertisements. The relationship between the brand and the
consumer has always been to keep the tradition, class and performance within
their products. Over the years, this assurance from the company has cemented a
loyalty with the customer, disruption within the factory line could put this
bond in jeopardy. The key elements to sustaining a brand for a long period of
time is to keep consistency with the customer. By changing a factor such as the
nation in the brand, this can create the illusion that the product will also
change. Therefore, a brand can be analyzed as a reassurance of consistency within
a product, using a logo as a universal approach of portraying this continuity.
In the case of the Italian olive oil, the brand
can acknowledge the stereotype of fresh olives in Italy and use this authentic
appeal to their advantage. The olive oil could be produced in England however,
by representing the oil as Italian, the company can embellish a sense of
authenticity with their product. The book ‘Dinnie, K. (2014) Nation Branding,
New York : Routledge’ touches on similar issues,
he states
‘Nations are making increasingly conscious
efforts to hone their country branding In recognition of the need to fulfill
three major objectives: to attract tourists, to simulate inward investment and
to boost imports.’ (Dinnie 2014)
By targeting a nation as a whole, companies can
make an individual feel singled out as the brand is targeting a group which the
individual already belongs to. The England football kit for example, already
creates the misconception that the viewer is part of the brand, the consumer
will then buy into the brand identity as they notice the coherence with their
own identity. The accolade of being English is exploited by the company in
order to increase sales within their product. Points which seem to re occur
within all forms of branding whether it be product, service or nation branding
are usually to boost popularity within their company which in turn will
increase money and fame.
In the book ‘Verma, H. (2010) Branding
Demystified, New Delhi : Sage Publications’ the author states,
‘On the one hand brands are devices and new
navigational tools for the marketers. On the other hand, brands have emerged as
new trusted compasses that help consumers spot the correct way through the
dense and dangerous marketing jungle .’ (Verma 2010)
Relating back to the Rolls Royce, brands have
become a visual tool to spot a trusted service or product upon the vast array
of competitor companies and corporations. The author is attempting to state
that brands have become a powerful money making tool for companies however,
they have also greatly benefitted the customer who can use brands as a guide to
make an informed decision on their purchase. This is in contrast with Naomi
Klein, has a very anti capitalist approach on the matter. From this point of
view, it can be approximated that branding has greatly improved the customers
perspective when choosing a product, therefore the higher quality products will
exceed in business whereas the poor products will fail. This creates a
universal language based on trust on previous customers judgment, the more
successful products such as Coca-Cola or McDonalds, obviously have an edge over
the competition which makes the brand so successful. This can be recognized by
a new customer who might never have tried the product before, this then allows
them to make a more informed decision that Coca-Cola is the more desirable
brand by the public and therefore the best quality.
However, this is not always the case, some high
quality products can be pulled back by unsuccessful branding which can then restrain
their product from being noticeable and successful. Some products which may be
of a higher quality than Coca-Cola can be abandoned by consumers who get sucked
into the status of the popular brand therefore, making the rich companies get
richer, and stopping the smaller companies from ever taking off. Creating
consistent high quality products which are labeled within a specific brand can
create a justified brand equity with a companies merchandise. These processes
can allow a product like Adidas, to create alternative products which are
purchased purely on the trust in the brand. For example, if Adidas manufactured
a new drink, their stability and popularity as a clothes manufacturer would
transfer across giving the impression that the drink superior to its
competitors, even though Adidas have no prior experience in producing drinks.
The author solidifies the theory about brand
equity within a company by stating that
‘A manager once observed that if Coca Cola were
to loose all of its production related assets in a disaster, the company would
survive, whereas if all of its consumers were to have a sudden lapse of memory
and forget everything related to Coca Cola, the company would go out of
business.’ (Verma 2010)
The authors concept provides supporting evidence
that the consumer has imprinted memory based on their trust with a specific
brand which influences their every day decisions. Were this memory to be
erased, Coca Cola would become insignificant in a consumers purchasing
decisions, therefore making the brand obsolete against the trusted competitor
brands such as Pepsi. This proposal also identifies the significance of the
customers power, Naomi Klein overlooks the fact that brands are meaningless
without consumers. She theorizes that the public is powerless towards the
dominant brands however, the willingness for these corporations to succeed is
in the hands of the consumers. The unidentified relationship which the consumer
has towards the brand is the ability to decide the fate of these multi million
pound corporations. Without their loyal customers, they would be worthless and
probably go bankrupt. If products such as the Xbox made a fault in a new
console which disabled internet access for
a whole year, competitors such as PlayStation would take over the market
and gain the trust of the loyal Xbox fans. In the supply and demand market
which exists today, a brand could become meaningless over night due to lost
trust and security within their products.
The relationship which the
brand has with the consumer is a reoccurring
prominent factor in all sources of information studied. Whether the
brand is helping build an improved civilization is down to personal preference
however, one thing is clear, every author notices the substantial effect which
brands have on the consumers opinion today. The rapid expanse of branding and
human population in the westernized capitalist world is such an outlying factor
that it points towards even more growth. Possibly the introduction of
conglomerate corporations in third world countries could start to appear but
one thing is clear, the way in which branding influences the money intake of
companies or the decisions and influence of the population suggests that
branding will never stop. Whether or not there is a limit to how much branding
can be acknowledged and therefore exist, only time will tell. Branding defines
every physical and digital product which is manufactured today, as long as the
internet, phones, televisions or cars continue to be produced, branding will
continue to influence the decisions of almost every person on the planet.
