No Logo, Skittles and digital empowerment
Naomi Klein's No Logo was a rallying cry for the anti-globalisation movement. It crystallised the sentiments of a public who had become disenchanted with the machinations of Big Business.
Whilst No Logo brought some previously ignored truths into the mainstream limelight it was short-sighted in placing the blame for society's misfortunes at the feet of multinationals. But Klein did a great job of picking up on the frustration and resentment felt by some towards the intrusion of brand messages into their day-to-day lives.
Klein's book is over a decade old now. Published in 2000, shortly after the anti-globalisaton protests at the Seattle WTO conferences, it was a different digital era to the one we enjoy today. These were the days before Facebook and Youtube, when even Google was just a dot on the horizon. The dot.com bubble, few high-bandwidth home connections and a lack of user-friendly platforms meant that internet use, whilst on the rise, was far from the level it's reached now.
Klein's generation of activists were not digitally empowered and were perhaps only dimly aware of the potential the web had to change the way the public interact with brands. The digital world is very much a public-mediated space. No matter how much a brand spends on establishing itself they're still essentially guests because permission-based marketing, where potential buyers must allow contact to receive a brand message, is a reality online.
It's a constant theme amongst digital marketeers and commentators. The internet has changed the way we do business, shop, entertain ourselves, communicate, live our lives. But it's also changed the nature of the discourse between the public and the powers that be. The democratisation of online communication has undermined the conventional top-down communication model that's been the norm.
In the offline world brands leverage their money and influence to occupy ad space and media channels. But online the tables are turned. Barriers to entry are low, almost non-existent, and the public can engage with brands on a more equal footing. From using ad-blocking software to clicking away from a site or passing on a link URL a user has the power to dictate their exchange with a brand to a far greater extent than in the offline world.
In 2009, Skittles turned its site into a social media portal effectively turning over it's web space to internet users. Barack Obama, hailed by some as one of the greatest politicians in american history, was able to break funding records through the use of innovative digital fund-raising strategies. And the struggles of the nascent democratic movements in North Africa have owed much to the networked nature of online communication.
These and other cases of digital empowerment may not fit Naomi Klein's ideal of a brand-free public space. But the multinationals have never been the issue. Rather, it's the framework through which discourse takes place between people, organisations and brands that leads to balanced exchanges. The online world has increasingly influenced mainstream culture and with time this influence should increase. Hopefully to an extent where offline exchanges can be as similarly balanced as online.
Whilst No Logo brought some previously ignored truths into the mainstream limelight it was short-sighted in placing the blame for society's misfortunes at the feet of multinationals. But Klein did a great job of picking up on the frustration and resentment felt by some towards the intrusion of brand messages into their day-to-day lives.
Klein's book is over a decade old now. Published in 2000, shortly after the anti-globalisaton protests at the Seattle WTO conferences, it was a different digital era to the one we enjoy today. These were the days before Facebook and Youtube, when even Google was just a dot on the horizon. The dot.com bubble, few high-bandwidth home connections and a lack of user-friendly platforms meant that internet use, whilst on the rise, was far from the level it's reached now.
Klein's generation of activists were not digitally empowered and were perhaps only dimly aware of the potential the web had to change the way the public interact with brands. The digital world is very much a public-mediated space. No matter how much a brand spends on establishing itself they're still essentially guests because permission-based marketing, where potential buyers must allow contact to receive a brand message, is a reality online.
It's a constant theme amongst digital marketeers and commentators. The internet has changed the way we do business, shop, entertain ourselves, communicate, live our lives. But it's also changed the nature of the discourse between the public and the powers that be. The democratisation of online communication has undermined the conventional top-down communication model that's been the norm.
In the offline world brands leverage their money and influence to occupy ad space and media channels. But online the tables are turned. Barriers to entry are low, almost non-existent, and the public can engage with brands on a more equal footing. From using ad-blocking software to clicking away from a site or passing on a link URL a user has the power to dictate their exchange with a brand to a far greater extent than in the offline world.
In 2009, Skittles turned its site into a social media portal effectively turning over it's web space to internet users. Barack Obama, hailed by some as one of the greatest politicians in american history, was able to break funding records through the use of innovative digital fund-raising strategies. And the struggles of the nascent democratic movements in North Africa have owed much to the networked nature of online communication.
These and other cases of digital empowerment may not fit Naomi Klein's ideal of a brand-free public space. But the multinationals have never been the issue. Rather, it's the framework through which discourse takes place between people, organisations and brands that leads to balanced exchanges. The online world has increasingly influenced mainstream culture and with time this influence should increase. Hopefully to an extent where offline exchanges can be as similarly balanced as online.
Comments
Post a Comment