http://adage.com/article/moy-2008/obama-wins-ad-age-s-marketer-year/131810/
In 2008 the Obama campaign won Advertising Age's Marketer of the Year award. Apple and Nike were among the giant corporations whose marketing campaigns were deemed by professionals in the industry to be less effective than Obama's.
Marketing is generally defined as "the process of communicating the value of a product or service to customers, for the purpose of selling the product or service. It is a critical business function for attracting customers."
It is clear that when marketing is "communicating" it is the kind of communication where asking and checking are discouraged. We receive information that is designed to give us a particular idea. And so, when Obama promised "hope" and "change" people tended to wave their flags and weep rather than asking: "hope for what?" or "what kind of change?". The campaign was designed to spark the normal human idea that things can be better and, quite naturally if not asking and checking, people went along with it.
But what kind of service was Obama really offering?
As all communication most basically works as: INFO----> IDEA, then to get more of an IDEA about anything, we need more INFO. Useful information to know about the Obama campaign in '08 is that it collected more money from Wall Street than the McCain campaign:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/06/05/analysis-shares-obama-idUKNOA53525520080605
It's interesting to note that this Reuters article explains this situation as "investors want to simply back the eventual winner" rather than explaining it as "big business is in bed with politics, and ordinary people simply get to choose which branch of the elite takes power."
In short, Obama was always going to serve the interests of big business and the powerful elite. That wouldn't really serve as an effective advertising slogan, though.
Here's an alternative view of marketing-
The recent whistleblowing by Edward Snowden illustrates an important aspect of the Obama administration's attitude towards communication.: We control information, not you. We will look at your information whilst keeping ours in the dark. And when we can get away with it we will get the clubs out and batter people to death.
Force is a very powerful tool of communication and has been used throughout history by people who want to get their own way without bothering with that tiresome communicative baggage that humans carry with them. Much easier to use your animal mode and start to hit people. Do not ask any questions. Do not check. Explain things in a way that makes you feel better about what you are doing.
That way, it becomes easier to do stuff like this:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/16949/predator-drone-strikes-50-civilians-are-killed-for-every-1-terrorist-and-the-cia-only-wants-to-up-drone-warfare
If we disagree with people, we kill them. And anyone who wanders into shot. This manic tendency towards violent communication and away from possible human communication is an inevitable consequence of an economic and political system that can only survive by stifling the natural human capacity to communicate.
But let's pretend otherwise, because there's profit to be made.
In 2008 the Obama campaign won Advertising Age's Marketer of the Year award. Apple and Nike were among the giant corporations whose marketing campaigns were deemed by professionals in the industry to be less effective than Obama's.
Marketing is generally defined as "the process of communicating the value of a product or service to customers, for the purpose of selling the product or service. It is a critical business function for attracting customers."
It is clear that when marketing is "communicating" it is the kind of communication where asking and checking are discouraged. We receive information that is designed to give us a particular idea. And so, when Obama promised "hope" and "change" people tended to wave their flags and weep rather than asking: "hope for what?" or "what kind of change?". The campaign was designed to spark the normal human idea that things can be better and, quite naturally if not asking and checking, people went along with it.
But what kind of service was Obama really offering?
As all communication most basically works as: INFO----> IDEA, then to get more of an IDEA about anything, we need more INFO. Useful information to know about the Obama campaign in '08 is that it collected more money from Wall Street than the McCain campaign:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/06/05/analysis-shares-obama-idUKNOA53525520080605
It's interesting to note that this Reuters article explains this situation as "investors want to simply back the eventual winner" rather than explaining it as "big business is in bed with politics, and ordinary people simply get to choose which branch of the elite takes power."
In short, Obama was always going to serve the interests of big business and the powerful elite. That wouldn't really serve as an effective advertising slogan, though.
Here's an alternative view of marketing-
The recent whistleblowing by Edward Snowden illustrates an important aspect of the Obama administration's attitude towards communication.: We control information, not you. We will look at your information whilst keeping ours in the dark. And when we can get away with it we will get the clubs out and batter people to death.
Force is a very powerful tool of communication and has been used throughout history by people who want to get their own way without bothering with that tiresome communicative baggage that humans carry with them. Much easier to use your animal mode and start to hit people. Do not ask any questions. Do not check. Explain things in a way that makes you feel better about what you are doing.
That way, it becomes easier to do stuff like this:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/16949/predator-drone-strikes-50-civilians-are-killed-for-every-1-terrorist-and-the-cia-only-wants-to-up-drone-warfare
If we disagree with people, we kill them. And anyone who wanders into shot. This manic tendency towards violent communication and away from possible human communication is an inevitable consequence of an economic and political system that can only survive by stifling the natural human capacity to communicate.
But let's pretend otherwise, because there's profit to be made.
Comments
Post a Comment