Branding, Culture, Politics, and Everything in Between

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

I’ve accepted a position at Aalto University’s Media Factory initiative as a researcher. This also marks the start of my doctorate studies. Yes, I’m aiming for a PhD in marketing.

This is basically what Media Factory does:

1. Media technologies
Paper and press technologies, (mass-produced print product/art print), ‘after paper’, the digital media, the future Internet

2. Media production and management
Journalistic working processes, interactivity, the public as a producer, formation of information, media economics and management

3. Media concepts and communications behaviour
Media concepts such as periodicals, Internet applications, games, the cinema, and audiovisual media. Communications behaviour such as the consumers’ use of media, media psychology and basic research on media concepts.

I’m interested in all three, but #3 is where I aim to really specialize. My interest is in how media (new and old) work in diffusing cultural meanings, especially on the internet where meanings flow so much faster but in many directions.

Wish me luck. I’m going offline for two weeks, I’m going to have a little vacation before I engulf myself in research.

If you don’t have the patience to watch the video clip above (you should, it’s one of the most moving videos I’ve ever seen), here’s a short recap of Jason McElway’s story: an autistic kid works as a team manager for his high school varsity team, and in the final game of the season, his coach gives him a chance to play, and he shines. Jason’s story has been featured on ESPN and numerous other networks. Hollywood has of course thrown his hat into the foray: Jason’s family has numerous offers for a feature film, one from Disney.

Moving “local boy” stories that make it big nationally are not a new phenomenon and exclusive to the digital age, but I think the digital age has changed how stories like these can be told and what kind of possibilities it opens for marketers. Because stories like this live on on services like YouTube, they can be narrated in a different way, a lot of nuances of the story can be left open for discovery and “digital folklore”. To illustrate my point, please watch this ad by Gatorade in which James was cast a while ago:

Notice that James’ presence is not highlighted at all. Most viewers will have no idea who that guy is, but that is actually part of the ad’s idea. People who have seen James and who were touched by the story will recognize him and this will create a whole new meaning for them. Most likely these people will forward both the first video and the ad video to their friends as a consequence. The ad is very powerful because the ad is relating to an experience that was very authentic. The challenge for Gatorade, however, is to create credible link to James by handling the subject with enough class and care. I think they did alright.

Earlier today, a 40-story hotel caught fire in Beijing. Within an hour of the fire starting, it was already big news on Twitter. Some people were naturally very concerned and shocked (especially Asian tweeters) of what was happening, but some were more interested about the novelty of the news itself, being the first ones on earth to know about it. People were spreading the story like crazy and I saw many tweets almost giddy about the fact that none of the major networks in the US had anything on the subject. Or to quote somebody from Twitter:

Now, I’m not saying that I have never acted in this manner myself or that I’m some how above this kind of behavior (hey, I pasted a link to some photos from the fire to my Facebook status), nor am I really condemning it (though some comments were a bit on the tasteless side considering there was a real chance of lives being at danger in the incident), but I’m starting to believe more and more that this kind of hypernovelty is not exclusively a positive phenomenon of social media.

There’s a certain allure in being “in the know”. One of the most common stereotypes in cultural products is the brave journalist with the scoop story exposing the truth. Our culture reveres the pioneer and the trend setter: it’s a staple of our culture and it’s often seen as a trait of individuality. You can hear it in the way we talk about our holiday experiences, how we like “discovering” (though that’s rarely the case) new things and recommending them to friends, the we shop for clothes, and the way we value expertise, just to name a few. Having your finger on the pulse is also a sign of passion and a keenness for a given subject, which is hardly a bad thing.

However, having your ear constantly on the ground puts a certain strain on you, especially in this day and age of ubiquity of information. Whenever a new story or something interesting thing pops up, some people have an urge to “break” the story and sort of put up a flag on the story that says that “if this story becomes big, remember my name!”.

Being “first” (a rather relative term, to say the least) to blog/tweet about something has become more important than actually writing something meaningful about the subject. The urgency to act (because somebody might write about first!) does not really allow for deep thought or fact-checking. It also feeds a certain anti-intellectualism, making debate or analysis less and less of a merit of expertise.

For example, online newspapers have had to sacrifice (grudgingly, at times) some of their quality control in favor of promptness, because blogs and social networks were beating them to the story so often (as said, the hotel incident was “old news” within two hours of it happening). Smart newspapers have moved on to offer more in-depth or second opinion pieces, but that’s a whole other post.

Relating to my own field, I don’t like it how so many marketing blogs, for example, have become more or less obsessed about spreading viral videos or “cool campaigns” instead of actually discussing them. And if there is any type of analysis being done, the tone is hyped and one-sided. Ideas are reduced to bullet points or statements that look great in keynote presentations, but might not have any theoretical substance to them.

Services like Twitter have their merits – especially in acting as an information filter and connecting like-minded people – but people tend to overvalue it and forget what the trade offs of a constant information flow are. It takes deep thought, taking your time and actually detaching yourself from the information overload to create original thought.

Speed isn’t everything.

I had a slight backlog on my TED videocasts and I went through a few them today. One of the videos I watched was Joseph Pine’s 2004 TED talk. This was before he had published the book Authenticity with Jim Gilmore, but this presentation is pretty much on the same stuff that’s being talked about in the book.

The book is essentially about authenticity becoming our (the consumers) primary buying sensitivity. First goods, then services, and now even experiences have become commoditized, so marketers have no choice but to offer authentic experiences. Or at least sell their experiences as more authentic as the competitors’. I had blogged about the book when it came out and I was going to revisit the subject at some point, but I never got around to it. But this is a good reason as any to revisit the subject.

One of the main tenets that stuck with me with the book was this little 2×2 diagram that Pine also had in his TED talk. It’s a screencap, so apologies for the quality.

The diagram has two axis: “it is what it says it is” and “it is true to itself”. What they mean is best illustrated via examples. The “Fake Fake” is rather self-explanatory, but for “Real Fake” Pine says that a tour at Universal Studios is a good example of this: it is real and it is what it says it is (being in Hollywood and a real studio), but it’s fake in the sense that it’s not really “true” to Hollywood because it offers a view behind the scenes, removing the veil of mystery behind Hollywood films. With “Fake Real” Pine says that Disneyworld is the perfect example: it’s not what it says it is – “It’s not a magic kingdom”, as Pine says – but it’s wonderfully true to itself in the sense that the experience is so wonderfully immersive and passionate, that it really captures the feeling of “magic kingdom”.

Which brings us to “Real Real”. When I was watching the TED talk it hit me that for cultural brands, of course, the goal is to embody both categories of “real”: they are both what they say they are and they are true to their selves. The “Real Real” distinction is a new way to conceptualize and complement Douglas Holt’s distinctions of brand literacy and brand fidelity.

Holt says that brand’s should demonstrate an understanding of its supporting demographic’s “populist world” and its custom’s and idioms (literacy). The brand should also understand its place in this populist world and play to it (like Harley does to biker culture and Apple to the creative industries). This is where the “it is what it says it is” comes to play: a brand must neither overstate nor deny its place in the populist world. Examples of brands trying to claim a stake in a subculture and failing are too numerous to list (especially brands trying to ride the hip hop craze in the late 90s), but the shoe brand Timberland tried to do the opposite, it tried to deny its place as a hip hop icon and suffered for it. As for brand fidelity, Holt argues that brands should honor their roots and sacrifice pandering to the masses by thinking populist world first. I think this can be seen as “staying true to itself” in many ways.

In short: brands should first understand what they are and what they mean to a given populist world (build brand literacy) so that they can “be what they say they are”. If no such links to relevant subcultures exist, then a brand should look to build and nurture meanings that have the potential to become such connections. Once the brand understands itself and its place, it should look to nurture this connection (show brand fidelity/be true to itself) and not alienate its core constituency as the brand grows in popularity.

Easier said than done, though.

Call it being on brand or just a refreshing break from the Bush years, but when Obama openly siad that he screwed up, it gave me a pause. To me it’s a small but very important gesture from the new administration that there’s a new way of doing business. It’s going to be interesting to see when Obama’s example will start to catch on in the business world, as Fast Company is predicting.

Of course, if you’re operating in the web 2.0 world you feel that this type of openness and new leadership is almost old news. But big business doesn’t work like that, and only a scant few business leaders (A.G. Lafley at P&G for one) have “gotten it” so far. As the president of the United States, Obama is a such a strong icon of leadership and example, that the rest of the management world might finally take note.

I watched My Blueberry Nights by Wong Kar Wai the other day. Had high expectations for the film, because I had just seen Ashes of Time and I thought it was outstanding in its cinematography. And in truth, in that aspect My Blueberry Nights didn’t disappoint: it was beautifully shot and lit. Wong Kar Wai really knows how to work a camera. But the movie itself left me a bit disappointed.

The problem with the movie is that it’s culturally very empty. It deals in traditional American settings: the open road, the corner diner and its locals, Las Vegas gamblers etc. But the thing is, the director treats these themes with an outsider’s eye, kind of like a tourist showing his holiday photos. I feel that the lack of gripping storytelling was missing, and I think it was because the storyteller had nothing new to say to me about what I was seeing. And I guess it bled over to the acting, because none of the actors really made an impression with me. It felt like an ode to Americana, but from a person who was not too familiar with the subject.

A much weaker American director would have been able to squeeze more cultural relevance out of this movie, probably with ease. But a weaker American director wouldn’t have been able to provide us with such delightful images.

An interesting predicament, I though.