Brands in the post-truth era
By: Desai, Santosh
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: Seminar: Cradle of Diversity Description: 736, Dec, 2020: p.20-22.Subject(s): Corporations and brands
In:
Seminar: Cradle of DiversitySummary: ‘This is a moment when many people may want nothing more than a return to normalcy, or to a status quo that is only comfortable if we avert our gaze from injustice. As difficult as it may be to admit, that desire is itself a sign of privilege. George Floyd’s death is shocking and tragic proof that we must aim far higher than a "normal" future, and build one that lives up to the highest ideals of equality and justice.’
This statement, made by the Apple CEO Tim Cook, was one of the several made by heads of large corporations and brands condemning the brutal police action that resulted in the death of George Floyd. Usually, this is the kind of statement one would expect a politician or the diplomatic mission of a country to issue in the wake of such an incident. After all, none of companies that have come forward to put their views in the public domain have anything tangible to gain by doing so; if anything, given that at least 40% of Americans seem to be solidly and bafflingly behind the political ideology that makes this kind of abuse systemic, they have plenty to lose.
A decade ago, it would be unthinkable for corporations to take such public postures. Brands have become like commentators that need to opine on everything that happens. Brands are exalted, boycotted, trolled. They in turn make policy announcements, see themselves as arbiters of truth, who weigh in on the issues of the day. In fact, the brand’s role was the opposite – to stay as blandly generic as possible when it came to any larger issues, hiding behind a veil of unctuous corporatese. Its interactions with the outside world were handled by an extremely select group within a corporation and monitored rigorously lest even a sliver of real opinion slither out.
Their concerns were considerably narrower – zone in on a promise and then find ways to magnify them till they felt irresistible. Advertising was the Pied Piper of the world of business, as it evolved its own distinctive grammar, it made no bones about the games of seduction that it set out to play. In a world of brands, our biggest concerns had to do with whether our toothbrush was reaching ‘those-hard-to-reach corners, or if our detergent washed our clothes the ‘whitest white’.- Reproduced
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 736, Dec, 2020: p.20-22 | Available | AR124876 |
‘This is a moment when many people may want nothing more than a return to normalcy, or to a status quo that is only comfortable if we avert our gaze from injustice. As difficult as it may be to admit, that desire is itself a sign of privilege. George Floyd’s death is shocking and tragic proof that we must aim far higher than a "normal" future, and build one that lives up to the highest ideals of equality and justice.’
This statement, made by the Apple CEO Tim Cook, was one of the several made by heads of large corporations and brands condemning the brutal police action that resulted in the death of George Floyd. Usually, this is the kind of statement one would expect a politician or the diplomatic mission of a country to issue in the wake of such an incident. After all, none of companies that have come forward to put their views in the public domain have anything tangible to gain by doing so; if anything, given that at least 40% of Americans seem to be solidly and bafflingly behind the political ideology that makes this kind of abuse systemic, they have plenty to lose.
A decade ago, it would be unthinkable for corporations to take such public postures. Brands have become like commentators that need to opine on everything that happens. Brands are exalted, boycotted, trolled. They in turn make policy announcements, see themselves as arbiters of truth, who weigh in on the issues of the day. In fact, the brand’s role was the opposite – to stay as blandly generic as possible when it came to any larger issues, hiding behind a veil of unctuous corporatese. Its interactions with the outside world were handled by an extremely select group within a corporation and monitored rigorously lest even a sliver of real opinion slither out.
Their concerns were considerably narrower – zone in on a promise and then find ways to magnify them till they felt irresistible. Advertising was the Pied Piper of the world of business, as it evolved its own distinctive grammar, it made no bones about the games of seduction that it set out to play. In a world of brands, our biggest concerns had to do with whether our toothbrush was reaching ‘those-hard-to-reach corners, or if our detergent washed our clothes the ‘whitest white’.- Reproduced
There are no comments for this item.