livingbrands

Stand up and be counted

John Grant has just posted on some of the corporate wrong doings of Coca-Cola, complete with a quote from Rita Clifton of Interbrand where she suggests that this isn't necessarily a big deal for the brand given that "People are radical in research questionnaires and reactionary at the checkout … People like to carry on doing what they like doing".

I was so incensed, I had to respond. Which I've repeated here as I think Coke's problems and Interbrand's POV highlight a big issue we need to grapple with...

Comments like that really piss me off. Are we so amoral (or immoral) that we really don’t give a shit if sales aren’t effected (which they will be in the long term, so ha ha - King Canute or boys with fingers in dykes spring to mind).

Wrong is wrong, and good businesses & brands (should) do something about it. Even if that’s just because of the strategic business sense in doing the right thing in a world where everyone can find out what they want about anything. But also (you can always hope) because they just recognise they should.

And even if our clients don’t want to know, surely it is our job to slap them round the face (maybe not literally) until they take notice. Doesn’t make you popular to be a Jeremiah figure like that, but it’s a dirty job and someone’s got to do it (as Faith No More once pointed out).

Hesitate making this point, but one of the first things that popped into my mind on reading your post was Martin Niemoller’s poem from WWII. That was a comment on evil in a very specific sense, and businesses doing what businesses do doesn’t come into that league (do they?!?).

But just made me think. If we say nothing and do nothing to change the way our clients behave, who will.?And what happens when it’s too late for them…and the world?

Rant over…

First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left
to speak up for me.

So my question is this: what is our role as 'consultants' to our clients. Are we there to do whatever asked (and to turn a blind eye). Or is it our job to help paper over the cracks and to get people looking the other way (I hope it's neither). Or are we just too scared, in this low margin, volatile business environment, to actually challenge clients on thorny topics (somehow that feels even worse).

Personally, I think it's about time for us to stand up and be counted. Obviously, what I see as an issue won't be an issue for everyone. But any issue that engages enough people will have a negative business impact eventually simply because information is so easy to find nowadays, and so easy to pass on to others.

I believe we will only be doing our job properly if we robustly challenge clients on the kind of issues Coke is now facing. Even if they disagree, we will probably sleep more easily at night. Which is why one of the first things we are now trying to do with a new or prospective is have a 'truth' session: cards on the table, what makes you great...but get the skeletons out of closets as well. Because if we don't know everything (particularly as some consumers will probably know already) we can't do our job properly.

More to life than this?

Neil Boorman is getting a lot of press coverage at the moment for his plan to burn all the brands he owns and start life afresh. And a fair bit of cynicism as well, it should be added. He is an experienced media player, as some have pointed out, and has a book deal in place already, so it could all be a publicity stunt.

All the same, his blog does seem to suggest some genuine integrity and soul searching, as does this article he wrote for the BBC. And from that BBC piece, I found the closing paragraphs particularly heart wrenching...

"Being the gullible fool that I am, I believed in the promises that these brands made to me; that I would be more attractive, more successful, more happy for buying their stuff. However, the highs of consumerism have been accompanied by a continual, dull ache, growing slowly as the years have gone by; a melancholy that until recently I could not understand.

I now realise that it's these damn brands that are the source of the pain. For every new status symbol I acquire, for every new extension to my identity that I buy, I lose a piece of myself to the brands. I placed my trust, even some love with these companies, and what have I had in return for my loyalty and my faith? Absolutely nothing. How could they, they're just brands.

So, this is why I am burning all my stuff. To find real happiness, to find the real me, I must get rid of it all and start again, a brand-free life, if that is indeed possible. Perhaps if I consume on the basis of need instead of want, on utility instead of status, I might start to value material things for the right reasons. For the time being, I can only hope."

Sadly though, whilst Neil may find momentary release in burning his brands, I'm not sure he will find lasting peace. Clearly we live in a world that is suffering from an excess of materialism, consumerism and status consciousness, with all the personal ,social and environmental issues these bring. And brands (or more truthfully, the businesses behind them) do play their part in this.

But, as a person of faith (Christianity in my case), I would have to say that I don't think brands themselves are the root of the problem, and the angst Neil is feeling (I couldn't do my job if I thought that).

They are a symptom not the cause; a misplaced, ineffective solution to a bigger problem - the desire and search for purpose and meaning; the sense that "there must be more" which we all have within us. And yes, brands do often promise to fill this hole (which IS something I struggle with). But the simple fact is they can't, only exacerbating the wanting and emptiness we feel.

So burning brands won't solve anything. And I must say I have huge reservations about its merits on a socially responsible, environmentally friendly front as well. If you want to get rid of stuff, give it to people who need it, or sell everything and give the money away. The burning bit is the one thing that does smack of self gratification (and self publicity).

Now I hope it will not be the case, but I really do doubt that Neil will find the happiness he craves in his newly non-branded world. He is still putting his faith in 'stuff', just 'stuff' without a logo...which is arguably just another kind of brand and a statement in its own right. The meaning and purpose he seeks will probably allude him, as it does all of us, until we connect with something bigger and more transcendent; something more significant than basic ego needs, that satisfies the emptiness we feel.

What that is will be different for different people (if you put me on the spot, I would tell you what I have found the answer to be). But paradoxically, it is probably only in realising that the 'stuff' of materialism and consumerism can never really satisfy our deepest needs, and in finding that deeper meaning elsewhere, that we become free to enjoy brands for what they are (and I do love many brands), rather be in thrall to what they seem to promise but never fully deliver.

Sermon over.

And I do recognise the irony of working for an ad agency!

Deliciously confused

Came across this yesterday: the del.icio.us page of Demos, the UK centre-left think tank.

Found a couple of useful things, but also confirmed something I've been thinking for awhile: that del.icio.us doesn't really work for me.

I get the idea: you can save things which are of interest to you, and look at what others are saving on topics you are interested in. And I get all the self defining/organising taxonomy thing.

But at the end of the day, it just feels to me like chucking things into big boxes in the attic: you know there's probably interesting and useful stuff up there (there may even be labels on the boxes), but it's all just too messy and random, and you can never find what you're looking for. Jumble sales and car boot sales spring to mind as well.

Happy to accept I'm in the luddite, old fashioned minority (what do others think?) or that I'm not using it properly (any top tips?), but I just can't be bothered with something that seems to make things more complicated rather than simpler.

Schrodinger's inbox

Why do we feel so compelled to 'just check' if we've had an email (at often ridiculous times of the day when we should have better things to do). Or, indeed, check our blog feeds to see if anyone is posting?

It all (possibly) comes down to Schrodinger's Uncertainty Principle. You know the thing: cat; box; is it alive or is it dead; until you look you can't know, so it exists in both states (I know there's more to it than that - radioactive isotopes and poison come in some where - but you get the gist). Well that's exactly what the world of digital information is like.

Once upon a time we had to survive on letters, parcels and postcards (blog posts for a pre-digital world!). These were concrete (not literally, obviously) 'things' that arrived twice a day. And if nothing came through the letter box you could be certain it wasn't going to. There was no point in going back to check at 2 in the morning.

Now though people can send emails or post on blogs from anywhere in the world 24:7. And this information is then instantly available to us, wherever we are and whatever the time is. But until we check we can't know this; they remain in Schrodinger's state of being yet not being (it's all 0s and 1s until our technology makes sense of it).

But unlike Schrodinger and his imaginary cat, we can't cope with this uncertainty. We have to have a peak, and a new neurosis for the digital generation is born.

No idea what this actually amounts to, but I like it as an idea. Maybe it's a comment on the insubstantial, illusory and transitory nature of the world we live in and lives we lead. After all, Youtube wouldn't exist if people didn't keep sneaking a peak to check whether the cat in the box is still alive. Will think on.

And I should point out that, as an idea, this isn'ts not totally mine. The original inspiration came from a comment in an article I read recently.

FutureScope 52

Just to let you know, the latest edition of my trends newsletter is now out: "emerging trends, new ideas and general thought stimulation"...or so it says on the cover.

Thanks for the heads up

I was kindly included in a list of blogs to check out over at Logic & Emotion. So thanks to David for the heads up. And I would thoroughly recommend a trip there if you haven't yet been. A very good blog, with great diagrams (like the one below) a speciality.

Anyone want to create content?

Wise words from Ian over out Crack Unit.

"Whenever you have an idea, or someone else has an idea that requires participation, just ask them (or yourself) one very very simple question: 'Would you do it?'. You may not be the target audience, but you’ll know, deep down, if what you’re suggesting is right"

It's all to east to fall into the 'let's do the user-generated-content-thing' trap. I know because I have done it. On many occasions. It's the current glib suggestion de jour.

Sometimes it IS the right thing to do. Other times it isn't - just because it's flavour of the month, doesn't mean it's right for everyone (next it will be 'let's do that Wiki thing'!).

And don't forget the 1% rule: that only 1% of visitors to your site will generate content, and only around 10% will properly interact with it.

That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Bu know what you getting in to, and make it as easy as possible for the maximum number of people to contribute.

Road trip tracks

My good friend Will Anderson is off to drive the interstates of the US for a fortnight, and is looking to compile the perfect soundtrack to accompany this jaunt.

Pop over here and let him know what you think.

Brands I like

I have started a second blog (as if I didn't have too much to do already). It's less a new launch and more a line extension. And it kind of does what it says in the title.

It's a collection of brands and businesses that have caught my attention because they seem to be doing interesting things…or that I just like because I do.

I'm going to try and add a new brand each week or so. And add to existing brands when I find new, interesting stuff.

Have a look.

Redefining movie success

There seems to have been a lot of gloating over the last few days in certain quarters about the 'failure' of Snakes on a Plane.

Now, the fact that 'failure' here seems to be defined as being a movie the completely delivers on what it promised (B-movie fun), that opened at no.1 in the US box office, and which took $15m in one weekend (despite being a lowish cost production with minimal marketing investment), smacks of sour grapes to me. Bring on more failures I say!

Like it or not, and regardless of cinematic qualities or bums on seats, this film has changed things in a significant way, and we will be feeling the reverbarations for some time.

This post by Dan over at New Persuasion makes the point very well and is worth a read. He makes a good case for how all the doom and gloom merchants have completely misunderstood the changing relationship we have with entertainment products, and that box office is no longer a meaningful measure of success.