Category : Marketing
Thought this was an interesting statement in an article about the Occupy Wall Street movement in yesterday’s AdAge: “…Occupy has turned out to be an incredibly powerful and extensible brand…” This is interesting from the standpoint that the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to have formed around a call to action in Adbusters magazine – which has been known to make bold statements against consumerism and “branding” in general.
As a marketer, my head raises up whenever the “b” word is invoked. I have read AdBusters for many, many years to keep me grounded and focused and thinking outside the normal branding/marketing box. I tend to gravitate toward many of the concepts spoken of through the pages of AdBusters, but I do also tend to hold to the theory that, like many other things, “branding” is not wholely evil in and of itself. In the holistic meaning of the term, “brand” or “identity” is inherent in every public thing. Folks will have a perception, good or bad, about a product, service, organization, person, idea or … yes … even a movement. It’s this initial perception that draws or repels people to or from something, in this case a movement. Brand can be a powerful force – even for a social change movement trying to buck the corporate system of consumerism. Is it good or bad to pay attention to this force as it applies to Occupy Wall Street? What do you think?