June 14, 2003
Unbrand America (with another brand)
Ok, I have really mixed feelings about Adbusters. On one hand I think they are dealing with some very important issues in Western culture and are quite vigorous and creative in the way they push their ideals. On the other hand I think they are often just plain wrong in the way they look at the world and its economics. They are infected by a very serious case of blame the messenger and also suffer from a serious case of delusional hypocriticalness. But often I find myself supporting their individual causes.
Brands and advertising are not the problem. The problem is the way certain corporations use brands and advertising. A subtlety that seems to be completely lost in world of Adbusters and Naomi Klein. The Brand is a tool. Advertising is a tool. Both are extremely useful. And both are used far more effectively by corporations then by their opponents. Blaming brands and advertising for the ills wrought by the likes of Enron, Monsanto and Dow Chemical is like blaming steel for the fact that Hitler and Bush use it to build weapons.
Branding and advertising are powerful tools. And in the right hands they can be used for very positive effects. And while they might not admit it, Adbusters just launched a potentially powerful branding campaign, ironically entitled Unbrand America.
The brandmark is a black dot, simple, bold and effective. The goal is get people to put it everywhere, blacking out corporate logos by the ceo-load. Good stuff. I support it completely and hope it takes off. Its about time we reclaim the power of branding and symbols from the publicly traded corporations that have been using them against us for the past century.
So go ahead and savor the irony by Unbranding America, with another brand of course.
Posted by William Blaze at June 14, 2003 09:53 PM | TrackBackI remember reading a long interview with Naomi Klein where she did acknowledge that No Logo was becoming a brand/logo itself. Personally, I'm still confused why Radiohead fans decided to coopt the movement and stick those not-really-that-cryptic stickers on everything. Don't they realize that just makes them (fans and band) a Grateful Dead for a new generation?
Posted by: matty on June 15, 2003 05:55 PMWell Radiohead are the new Dead aren't they? Actually I'm in no position to talk about either as I dislike them both equally. Sitting right there in the top 5 most overrated groups on my list.
As for Naomi Klein. She is certainly aware of how both her name and No Logo are becoming brands in themselves. But she also seems to suffer from some serious cognitive dissonance due to that awareness. She tries pretty hard to "unbrand" herself, but still falls back on her brand to further push her agenda (as she should). Only reason she gets the relatively high profile writing gigs she does is because her name is a recognizable brand name.
I saw her speak a few years back in Montreal. She talked briefly about a student tell her how "ironically" all the energy that Nike invested in their brand was actually helpful to the people protesting her. No fucking duh. And even as those words came out of Klein's mouth it was clear she just didn't get it. It was like the truth was stepping right off her tongue and smacking her in the face and she just went on ignoring it.
Brands aren't inherently evil in any way shape or form. They are a way to transmit information, both good and bad. Big corporations try and control the information attached to their brand, sometimes to the point where they engage in serious lies to mislead the public. And that's why Klein gets mad, that makes me mad too. But the problem is not the brand, its the corporation behind the lies.
The brand can just as easily carry information that is against the corporation. And due in large part the Nike brand actually carries a lot of negative associations. The culture jamming that Klein loves is just another form of branding, one that isn't controlled by the company. What we need is a world where brands carry more truthful information, not one where there are no brands.
I like to point out the case of Troop shoes to show how branding can be reversed. In Troops case it got turned on them in a way that's just as bad if not worse then the sort of branding control Nike engages in. For a brief moment around 1986 Troop was the hottest shit on the NY streets. Hotter then Nike, hotter then Adidas and the rest. And then the rumor spread. They were owned by the KKK. And the brand was killed. Troop = KKK and no one would wear it. The company lost control of the brand and died. [ http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/troop.asp ].
Now that's not right, but it does illustrate a key point. The brand does not need to be controlled by the corporation. The public can associate the brand with anything. The companies will do their best to maintain their image, but ultimately its not in their control. The brand is a tool that can be used to spread the truth. If enough people think Nike = sweatshop their vaulted brand will be worth crap. And that's what Klein wants. But she doesn't quite get it.
Posted by: William Blaze on June 16, 2003 08:04 PMI agree indefinitely with Blaze above. I came upon the black spot phenomena two weeks ago in AdBusters, went to the unbrandamerica website with an English major friend of mine, really found ourselves enthused with what we found until we came across a link to download the black dots. WHAT!! DOWNLOAD BLACK FLOOKIN DOTS!!! Arright, I guess so... whatever gets you guys off. But I still support what they stand for. That's why you'll find for now on big black dots (that I did not download) around my tiny town of 35,000.
Posted by: The Dude on October 7, 2003 11:06 PMI agree indefinitely with Blaze above. I came upon the black spot phenomena two weeks ago in AdBusters, went to the unbrandamerica website with an English major friend of mine, really found ourselves enthused with what we found until we came across a link to download the black dots. WHAT!! DOWNLOAD BLACK FLOOKIN DOTS!!! Arright, I guess so... whatever gets you guys off. But I still support what they stand for. That's why you'll find for now on big black dots (that I did not download) around my tiny town of 35,000.
Posted by: The Dude on October 7, 2003 11:06 PMSigh...So what do yous think now that Adbusters has launched its own "blackspot" sneaker brand, manufactured in an abandoned Nike factory in South Korea? Guess Lassn's trustfund must be running short. Cheap shot that Adbuster's put Naomi Klein's photo on the "talkers"(as opposed to "walkers") page of their most recent issue, because she opposes this opportunistic move.
They can kiss my 10-year-old subscription goodbye. Disturbing that Nina Utne, Derrick Jensen, and Mr. Lassn all appear to be seduced by money.
Posted by: kitty on February 23, 2004 02:13 AMi love your site http://dishtv.freehomepage.com
Posted by: dish tv network on October 30, 2004 07:28 PMplease donate your used clothing to help the poor for a list of used clothing centers http://pused.webhostzero.com/
Posted by: wet used panties clothing on October 31, 2004 07:49 AMOther free penis enlargement guides are easier to commence. Most common are jelqing, dry milking, and PC free penis enlargement guides. There are also free penis enlargement tips especially researched and recommended for beginners.
Posted by: enlarge penis size on February 6, 2005 12:08 AMi gotta say i disagree
Posted by: Backroom Facials on March 29, 2005 09:34 AM
