Another question to me is: « are
brands human ? ». Just asking myself this question makes
me feel like being on « Irobot ». I don't know if you've
read this book (don't talk to me about the movie, the book was
written by a genius even though I don't like science fiction) but it
deals with robots taking over since they were empowered because they
were of great utility to human beings. In this book, robots are in
charge.
Brands are everywhere. In front of me,
I have Apple, Coke, Danone ; on my left Evian... We pratically
live with them (in our fridge, on us, for us...). You'd like to live
with a human wouldn't you (for the sake of argument, let's consider
that Pitsy the cat is human) ?
Maybe the frequence of exposure and
moreover the way we talk about them (and not to them I hope) are
relevent factors in this case. While mentioning a brand we tend to
use the words « heritage », « identity »,
« DNA », « values », « death »,
« reborn ».... Amusingly enough, when I typed on Google
« coke human » the two other words proposed by the search
engine were « rights violation »...
Given the importance we gave to brands,
aren't they empowered enough to be in charge ? We usually talk
about heritage, identity, death, rebirth...
Even Jez
Frampton, the CEO of interbrand said it : « the future is
human ». And in the end, even a brand has to pay
taxes (not 75% but still)... Definitely worth wondering.
Here's an interesting article about
« the newest marketing buzzword ? Human » :
Last but not least, an article
explaining better than I could myself how Coke is trying to be
human :
Emma G
No comments:
Post a Comment