“What is the relationship between branding and The Consumer Self?”

Branding has revolutionized and expanded greatly since the 1950’s, with the introduction of television ads and the digital age emerging in the 70’s. It appeals to a way of life the consumer aspires to, or thinks that they aspire to but have not yet achieved. The relationship between branding and the consumer is a constant power play of the unpredictable needs of the consumer and the problems and contradictions that holds for the brand to solve.

There is a constant struggle for a brand to be seen to do the right thing, in light of things like healthy eating or their impact on the environment. If we the consumer allow brands to act the way they do, then they will. We have the power to change it but we have to accept that, that change will have its implications and the question is, are we willing to deal with them? This essay explores this power struggle in more depth by using resources that show both sides to the battle, between branding and the consumer.

Muir and Miller (2004) believe that the best definition for a brand was given by Gardner and Levy in 1955:

“It is a complex symbol that represents a variety of ideas and attributes. It tells the consumer many things, not only by the way it sounds (and its literal meaning if it has one) but, more important, via the body of associations it has built up and acquired as a public object over a period of time.” Brands are created by people, it exists only in their minds, it is also the result of human behavior as they are judged for their actions (Muir and Miller, 2004). A brand therefore has and is something that we can connect with and create this relationship with. Without a brand these things are just objects, they don’t have any real meaning or importance, a brand is recognition and status, it is a representation of qualities such as reliability, safety and innovation. Because a brand is created by people, human emotions are evoked and used to create the connection between a brand and a consumer. People know what people want, and this is why the connection can be extremely strong. Advertising has become like a religion – preaching a ‘better life’ (Firth, 2011, p.2).

Branding however can be seen as interpreting the world around us and explaining things but, in its own terms (Berger, 2012). It suggests that there are inadequacies with the way you are and live, promising you improvement. Berger also goes on to explain how publicity works on our anxieties about money and status, it brings out the need to compete with others. It plays on the fear of not being desirable, of being unenviable. Branding also appeals to a way of life which the consumer aspires to, or thinks that they aspire to, but have not yet achieved. Berger has really highlighted how branding has taken control of society and the strong influence it has on people. It seems to target people who can’t afford not to be ‘glamourous’, as advertising focuses on settings, pleasures, objects, poses, symbols of prestige, gestures and signs of love. These are things that we dream about, they are ideals created by us but publicity proposes this is the only way and that we change are lives for the better when we buy into these things, as it shows us how people have been transformed.

Sigmund Freud’s interpretation of ‘the Self’ helps us understand why what Berger says could be true. He compromised three different systems, the Id (Instincts), Ego (Reality) and the Superego (Morality). Conflicts between the Id and the Superego show how we have to repress and control our desires, but this repression can erupt in defense mechanisms such as violence (McLeod, 2013). Edward Bernays (1891-1995) was a relative of Freud’s who worked in public relations post war. Based on the ideas of Freud that “irrational forces drive human behavior” (American Psychological Association & Held, 2009), If you made people feel the pleasure principle is being met, you can control them. Bernays' worked closely with the government through product placement, celebrity endorsement and use of the pseudo-scientific reports, all of these things advertising today still use. In 1929 it was unheard of for women to smoke in public, Bernays' however soon changed that for his client who owned the ‘Lucky Stipe’ brand of tobacco. He launched his ‘Torches of Freedom’ campaign where famous women could be seen smoking in public at New York’s annual Easter parade in 1929. “Bernays' was duly convinced that linking products to emotions could cause people to behave irrationally. In reality, of course, women were no freer for having taken up smoking, but linking smoking to women's rights fostered a feeling of independence.” (American Psychological Association & Held, 2009).

Ideas of branding began to expand around the 1950’s and 1960’s when there were post-war shortages, which is why there were compliant consumers, they didn’t question a brand because they were grateful for whatever they could have. But nowadays people are the ones that bring a brand to life, “A brand is simply a collection of perceptions in the mind of the consumer.” (Muir & Miller, 2004, p.71). We are the ones that create these dreams and pleasures branding is just acknowledging this and giving the consumer what they desire, as the idea initially began with them. Within the 20^th century design now plays more of a role in desirability and sale ability of a product rather than for productivity and speed. Sparke suggests “For these new consumer’s appearance and life-style were becoming increasingly important and this pointed the way to products becoming a means of offering them style and social status which, in turn, called for increased product elaboration.” (Miles, 1998, p.37-38). This is because in the 1920’s the focus of products began to be ‘eye-appeal’ aimed at continual stylistic change in order to raise sales and profits. Manufacturers noticed the economic benefits of this, that something goes ‘out of fashion’. Miles also notes “Compulsory obsolescence is the foundation-stone of the modern design industry and involves the intentional design of products for a short-term use.” (Miles, 1998, p.38) Designers now design things to ensure there is a constant demand for their new product. Miles is also aware of the expansion of consumerism from social change and advance in technologies as he says ‘A thriving economy and the fact consumers had more disposable income encouraged the development of an increasingly eclectic market-place.’ (Miles, 1998, p.39).

If these brands are satisfying people and making them happy is there really an issue of brand control? As Soloman says “many consumers buy products, not because they have practical utility but because they provide pleasure, entertainment and hope” (Soloman et al. 1999, p.20).

Brands play on our emotions to develop an emotional connection with the consumer so that the consumer is more compliant. Emotional loyalty is created between the brand and the consumer to an extent, such as if a brand over delivers and does more than expected, loyalty is more likely to be formed. This is not necessarily a form of control because trust and loyalty goes two ways. The brand expects you to stick with them and continue buying their goods. But the consumer also expects high quality and that it meets their demands. Trust is the very foundation that the relationship between branding and the consumer is built upon. Trust is linked to the functionality, with high trust the consumer is more certain, as it guarantees quality (Muir & Miller, 2004, p.81). Unbranded production usually leads to a deterioration in quality and consumers are usually less likely to buy them because of this; which really highlights that in fact consumers do have the choice, but they prefer something where the risk of disappointment is perceived to be lower (Muir & Miller, 2004, p.81). Because of the increase in low-trust societies it has produced a new consumer who scrutinizes the brand more thoroughly (Muir & Miller, 2004, p.81).

We the consumer, actually have a lot of control over brands as they are competing to satisfy us, we don’t have to buy what they’re selling. Growing confidence within consumers has seen a radical change in branding strategies. We review, comment and give feedback nowadays, showing the power we have gained. This means that companies are listening to what consumers have to say, because if they don’t then consumers will take their money elsewhere. John F Kennedy once said “If consumers are offered inferior products, if prices are exorbitant... if the consumer is unable to choose on an informed basis, then his dollar is wasted... and the national interest suffers." (Firth, 2011, p. 3). Consumer confidence is really important as it helps to make the markets work with increased innovation and economic growth (Firth, 2011, p. 3). With the expansion of social media, giving feedback on products and checking the quality, such as a 5-star rating, consumers have a more informed decision on what they are buying. Consumers can choose whether to boycott the brand or to buy into brands they like by buying and promoting it (HBS Working Knowledge et al. 2014).

This advert clearly represents a response to changing needs of the consumer while still using old methods of tapping in to our wants and desires to further push sales. Brand products need to keep up with the changing needs of the consumer, if their needs change or something better comes and the brand hasn’t responded or met these needs, then the consumer will be gone (Muir & Miller, 2004, p.71). This really stresses how much consumers are in control, the consumer ultimately has the decision on what they want, brands just supply the demand, it just depends on how well they do that. Coca-Cola responded to the new healthy eating/drinking craze and better body image by producing ‘Coke Zero’, different from normal coke as it has no sugar and no calories. On the right we have the Coca-Cola Zero: “Explosion 1” outdoor advert by Grey Copenhagen which was released in February 2008. The graphics within the advert contains an explosion around the bottle with things like a motorcycle, disco ball, girls and animals which all represent ‘cool’ and ‘exciting’ things. The message portrayed is if you drink this you’re living your exciting life as you should be, it gives the drink masculinity, personality and with that power.

Branding plays a large part in our society through politics, sports, culture and the voluntary sector, even charities have adopted the idea of branding (Olins, 2005, p.11). This is not necessarily a bad thing because it had aided our society and helped give money to causes that really need it, so in effect it has helped change our society for the better. Characters from brands have also been integrated into our society and become part of our lives, as Solomon says “more consumers could recognize such characters then could identify past prime ministers, business leaders or artists.” The problem lies with how branding is used not branding itself, branding is a tool and the way in which it is used and for what purpose is what it important. Anti-globalists believe that brands are like a weapon, creating more problems like waste and use of declining resources (Olins, 2005, p.9). If consumers helped change a brand for the better it wouldn’t be seen as a ‘weapon’, in more and more cases where consumers are taking control, brands are addressing these issues. Consumers however do expect too much from companies and try and exploit obligations (Solomon et al., 1999, p.16). As mentioned, if the consumer doesn’t like the brand and what it stands for we don’t have to buy them.

Wolfsohn (2011) however, makes some very valid points as he believes that companies are still in control. Just because we perceive to be able to complain, and have our voices heard doesn’t mean that the companies are doing anything about it. It could merely be set in place to satisfy us into thinking that they are listening, when in fact they are still doing things the way they have always done. Support from this comes as “Ads are periodically placed in between the featured content and the audience has the option to ignore them when turning the page” (Wolfsohn, 2011) this shows the brand still has control over what it wants to say even if the consumer chooses to ignore it. But ads now even follow internet users and access personal information, this is an aggressive form of branding that has happened because we have decided to ignore some ads, instead we are now being forced to see them. Although, these ads are usually related to things we have been browsing on the web, they are tailored for us, this shows the desire for brands to sell, so they aim it straight at their target audience.

Social media plays a massive role in customer feedback, everyone has become a critic and this can reach a large audience in seconds (HBS Working Knowledge et al., 2014). This has made it “easier for marketers to react more quickly.” (Wolfsohn, 2011). They need to be more careful with what they do and say, but this doesn’t mean they have lost control, they just have to gain control in a different way. In 2009 the Sci-Fi channel changed its name to Syfy, even though there was widespread disapproval. Because the company stuck with the new rebranding It actually within a few months set several viewership records and the dislike towards the rebrand has basically disappeared (Wolfsohn, 2011). This reinforces that fact that brands do not necessarily bend to what the consumer wants, they are still the dominant one within the consumer brand relationship. Social media “can improve a brand’s reputation by quickly turning negative events into positive ones.” (HBS Working Knowledge et al., 2014). Linking back to the perceived need for a product, as with the ‘Torches of Freedom’ campaign. Companies are monitoring social media and quickly addressing complaints and turning them into positive promoting, which has become an asset to branding strategies.

Brands are becoming vulnerable, they think that they know best in every situation, they try to predict what the customer wants. How can something keep up with the unpredictable consumer who didn’t like one thing last week but today loves it. “Customers can be loyal, fickle, slaves to fashion, creators of trends or all of these simultaneously or serially.” (Olins, 2005, p.220_). Because of the conflicting views consumers have it is also extremely hard for a brand to satisfy both. Independent stores go out of business because they are more expensive and stock less which leads the consumer to blame big corporations. But is the consumer really to blame for the way in which companies brand themselves? If they try to be good, overheads increase leading to higher prices which consumers are unlikely to accept. Brands aren’t as powerful as they look, as they have such a challenge of navigating through the problems and contradictions consumers create.

This brings forth the question that if companies told the truth would there be a shift in power towards the consumer? If brands tell the truth of the problem consumers will have a more informed decision whether to stick with that brand. The reluctance to say the truth is what has an impact on sales, so this would be mutually beneficial, but ultimately keeping the power with the consumers. The problem is “Companies will embrace social responsibility when it is in their long-term financial interest to do so.” (Olins, 2005, p.230). This indicates the consumer can take that power but most of the time we chose not to. As soon as brands and the companies behind them stop profiting off consumers, they will immediately change so that they do.

Although it is clear through some of the techniques that branding uses that they do try to manipulate consumers, In the end, the brand will do what the consumer wants. It is evident from all the research and feedback brands do before they launch a new product, that things need to be more considered. This however will only happen when the consumer decides to take more control of the situation. If the consumer works with the brand providing this feedback, more consumer focused products will be produced. Companies have been changing their ways to improve their relationship with consumers, such as shutting down sweatshops and controlling their impact on the environment, but these are very small steps and this has happened when it has had an impact on the company and their cash flow has been affected. It is very clear that there is a power struggle and a constant battle, identifying where and how changes can be made is crucial for consumers to have more of a voice and impact. Branding is important and if companies chose to work with the consumer rather than to manipulate, the world would truly benefit. Generally, people do like brands because it gives them status and seems to make life easier and more appealing. There needs to be a balance where the brand helps the consumer and the consumer helps the brand.

Bibliography

American Psychological Association and Held, L. (n.d.) ‘Psychoanalysis shapes consumer culture’, American Psychological Association, http://www.apa.org, [online] Available from: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/12/consumer.aspx (Accessed 28 December 2015).

Berger, J. (2012) ‘John Berger / ways of seeing, episode 4 (1972)’, [online] Available from: https://youtu.be/5jTUebm73IY.

Coloribus Advertising Archive (n.d.) ‘Coca-Cola Zero: “EXPLOSION 1” outdoor advert by grey Copenhagen’, The Coca-Cola Company, [online] Available from: http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/outdoor/coca-cola-zero-explosion-1-11199655/ (Accessed 5 January 2016). (Fig 1)

Curtis, A. (2007) ‘Introduction to century of the self (2002) BB4’, YouTube, YouTube, [online] Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=x_YLy6yZeaw (Accessed 14 November 2015).

Firth, L. (2011) Consumerism and ethics, Cambridge, Independence Educ Pub.

HBS Working Knowledge, Nobel, C. and Avery, J. (2014) ‘A brand manager’s guide to losing control’, Forbes, Forbes, 19th March, [online] Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2014/03/19/a-brand-managers-guide-to-losing-control/ (Accessed 15 December 2015).

HBS Working Knowledge, Noble, C. and Avery, J. (2014) ‘A brand manager’s guide to losing control’, Forbes, Forbes, 19th March, [online] Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2014/03/19/a-brand-managers-guide-to-losing-control/2/ (Accessed 15 December 2015).

McLeod, S. (2013) ‘Sigmund Freud’, SimplyPsychology, [online] Available from: http://www.simplypsychology.org/Sigmund-Freud.html (Accessed 28 December 2015).

Miles, S. (1998) Consumerism: As a way of life, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications.

Muir, D. and Miller, J. (2004) The Business of Brands, United Kingdom, Wiley, John & Sons.

Olins, W. (2005) Wally Olins: On brand, New York, Thames & Hudson.

Solomon, M. R., Zaichkowsky, J. L. and Polegato, R. (1999) Consumer behaviour: Buying, having, and being, Canadian edition, Scarborough, Ont., Prentice Hall Canada.

Wolfsohn, M. (2011) ‘The consumer Isn’t really in control’, Ad Age, [online] Available from: http://adage.com/article/agency-news/consumer-control/149561/ (Accessed 15 December 2015).

Context of Practice

Sunday, April 24, 2016

OUGD401 Module Evaluation

OUGD401 Practical Self Evaluation

OUGD401 COP Final Essay