The New Macbook Pro

For my entire time at Andover, my laptop computer has been a Compaq Presario, which needless to say is not the best piece of technology out there. These three and a half years have been enough time to dream of getting a better computer, and like millions of other people, that computer is the Macbook pro. Apple has gradually attracted me more and more to their products, so I planned on getting a Macbook pro after graduation.

But something very enticing happened recently: rumors about a new Macbook pro began to circulate throughout the internet, and about a week ago to a substantial degree. Large amounts of speculation  about possible new upgrades ran rampant and rumors about the release date exacerbated the hype. And finally today, on Steve Jobs' birthday, the new Macbook was released. I'm not sure if the leaked plans for the new Macbook pro were intended by Apple or not, but they certainly helped to advertise Apple's new product and propel their brand identity.

The people who will be most eager to buy the new Macbook are huge Apple fans, ones who scan websites, forums and blogs dedicated to Apple. This is where a lot of the speculation regarding the updated laptop release took place, so right there is an initial demographic ready and willing to either purchase or tell people about the new computer. Once this group of people is informed, it's only a matter of time before the news becomes widespread.

Apple's brand has always been one identified as being "current," "superior" and "exciting." The hype over the new release adds onto what Apple has already been able to make people think about it. In the words of Kevin Roberts, Apple is a "lovemark" brand, "infused with mystery, sensuality and intimacy, and [one] that you recognize immediately as having some kind of iconic place in your heart."

The word "intimacy" related to Apple as a brand becomes very apparent in this recent release. Steve Jobs is the founder of Apple, so people who love the brand also love him. What better way to exploit this relationship than to release the new Macbook on his birthday. This ploy by Apple on top of Jobs' recent health issues certainly creates an emotional connection with Apple, making the brand more effective.

Who is worthy?

Four Americans Held on Hijacked Yacht Are Killed is the title of a recent front-page headline in the New York Times. The article starts off with the story of one of the couple's dream to sail around the world, which ended in tragedy at the hands of Somalian pirates. Toward the beginning of the narrative, almost nonchalantly, the author mentions the  "epidemic" of modern-day piracy that began a few years ago. "Epidemic" is a pretty strong word, especially to describe something that is barely touched upon toward the end of the article.

Worthy and unworthy victims immediately popped into my head when I read this. Rather than use the murders as an opening to an article addressing the bigger problem in the seas off the coast of Somalia, the article is dedicated to this one instance and the people involved. I am not saying that the story isn't newsworthy, but surely an "epidemic" is worthy of more coverage.

This story is front-page worthy because the victims are Americans, and not because piracy is an issue. Had the victims been a Somalian cargo ship crew or the like, I don't think the story would be receiving the coverage that it is. Unsurprisingly, American news sources preference stories with American interests and people involved.

"Worthy" and "American" are somewhat synonymous in national news outlets, epitomizing American narcissistic tendencies. All too often Americans are impartial to international news, thinking, "Well, if it's not happening to me, then it doesn't matter." But the stories happening around the world are on a scale Americans are often unable to comprehend in the comfort of modern American society. There are in fact Somalian pirates wreaking havoc on ships, people all around the world dying of starvation and countless other things that should be worthy of Americans' attentions, but simply don't make the cut.

Well how does that make you feel?

Affective marketing is a marketing technique used to appeal to the emotions of potential consumers. As Clotaire Rapaille suggests, people make mental connections with certain words and things, and emotions are the keys to making such connections. These connections, or codes as Rapaille says, are made mostly during one's childhood, so the nature of one's upbringing is vital to how affective marketing effects targeted consumers. Based on this logic, brands and corporations will have more effective advertising if they follow the codes and spark mental, emotional connections from targeted consumers' early lives.

A prime example of this is the NFL's Superbowl "Best Fans" commercial, where a host of TV show characters from the 70's up through today are featured wearing professional football team memorabilia. Most of the shows depicted hit home with middle-aged people who were children or younger when these shows were popular. The Brady Bunch, Happy Days and  The Dukes of Hazzard were beloved TV shows for children of the 70's, who are now at parenting age. If parents associate fond, emotional connections with the NFL, then they will be more inclined to watch it and so will their children.

Another example that we have discussed in class is the Volkswagen "The Force" commercial. Although the child is the main focus of the ad, it is the middle-aged parents who grew up watching Star Wars and playing with Jedi action figures that can relate to the kid trying to use the force. This makes sense considering that people who grew up in the 70's are now at the age where buying cars and family are important parts of their lives. 

I'd hate to tie religion into my media studies again, but here it goes.

Based on my own experience and my viewing of the documentary Jesus Camp, I have observed that religion is pushed onto children as early as possible to develop deep mental connections to ensure positive connotations with religion later in life, so that they continue to practice faith. As Rapaille might say, a series of codes are formed to associate "goodness" and "acceptance" with religious culture. If these "mental highways" are formed early enough and sturdily enough, it is virtually impossible to break them. It's as if a brand conditioned children at early ages to appreciate, love and even rely on it. And later in life, when the brand advertises its products or services, deep-rooted emotional connections will have already been associated with the brand and consumers will be unconsciously compelled to consume whatever the brand is marketing.  

Loyalty Beyond Reason: Part 2

I cannot get this idea of "loyalty beyond reason" out of my head. But as I have found out, this notion plays a larger part in the world around me than I realized.

As I was listening to an audio book by Sam Harris entitled "The End of Faith," Harris points out that, given today's widely accepted scientific findings, certain religious beliefs are illogical, yet billions of people still hold them to be fact. The creation of the Earth 6000 years ago, supernatural abilities and the origins of the human race with Adam and Eve go against the most basic concepts of science. Despite archeological evidence and verified science, people still remain loyal to their belief systems. So now I ask myself, how do religions brand themselves, and do corporate brands use similar methods?

Religions brand themselves as being a means of salvation for whoever chooses to participate as well as a source for answers, counsel and social acceptance. The biggest "advantages" one has when part of a belief system is feelings of acceptance and reassurance. The most popular religions have answers to life's most troublesome questions, e.g. what happens when we die? and what is my purpose on Earth? Most religions have guidelines to living a fulfilling and good life, which gives followers the feeling of doing the right thing: I would go so far as to say that religions practice affective marketing at its finest. Following a religion also entails being a part of a group of people with a common respect for and bond with one another, and this accepting community can be an attractive quality of practicing faith.

Even though Nike has not yet proclaimed eternal salvation for its loyal consumers, corporate brands present themselves in ways similar to religions and strive to play similar, obviously less significant roles in people's lives.

Like religion fills a spiritual or social void in one's life, branded products are marketed to seem as if they serve a purpose in one's life that is not already being served: the classic commercial structure of problem-product-solution comes to mind. This is the assurance aspect, where brands appeal to areas in consumers' lives that are presented as lacking something.

With bigger brand names such as Apple, Under Armor, Lacoste, etc., acceptance and repute in a community are considerable motivations for consumers to purchase popular, branded products. When two people follow the same religion, they automatically feel some connection with one another, and this type of dynamic fosters social interactions. Similarly, when two people sitting in a subway car are using their iPhones, they both know that the other made the same decision to purchase an iPhone and therefore share something in common. Now when millions of people decide to have iPhones, others will want to be a part of the group of people who have iPhones so that they can feel accepted as part of the larger whole, too.

I have a theory about religion and corporate branding, which is that in order to gain faithful consumers, those seeking consumers do everything they can to convince consumers that their lives are simply incomplete and that consuming their faith/product will somehow fill the missing pieces in consumers' lives. Religions do this by proposing that their codes of ethics ensure moral stability, and that living in the name of God is the way to a fulfilling life and afterlife. Corporate brands do this by saying their products do things that no other product can do and that their products will make people happier. But are atheists devoid of ethical, moral values, and can a phone with a slightly bigger screen and blue-tooth capability really make me happier?

Wow, James Franco Sure Is Leisurely

http://goremaster.com/blog/2010/04/19/james-franco-birthday-april-19/

James Franco is a very successful guy. He has made millions in blockbuster films such as Spider-man and Milk, and has become a household name. Now Franco is an Oscar-nominated actor, who coincidentally will be co-hosting the Oscars. But there is a side to this celebrity people do not normally see. After becoming a successful actor, Franco since 2006 has attended a host of colleges such as UCLA, Columbia University, the NYU's Tisch School of the Arts, Brooklyn University and most recently Yale University where he is working toward a Ph.D. in English. Franco is also an amateur painter and wrote a series of short stories which he had published. All of these things are a product of Franco's accumulated wealth, and as Veblen would say, are evidence of Franco's life of conspicuous leisure.

According to Veblen, people thrive to be in a position that permits "higher thinking," which is an unproductive consumption of time: when Franco was an actor, his job did not involve much intellectual or academic thinking. There was some void Franco wanted to fill in his life, so he decided to take on a more predatory, and leisurely, work.

People assume that wealthy celebrities have the pecuniary strength to be leisurely and consume large amounts of time and goods, so celebrities need to be particularly conspicuous in order to stand out from the clutter of famous people trying to brand their names. When one sees the insane amount of academic accomplishments Franco has accumulated in the past four years, it's hard not to think of the time and money needed to do all of those things. It makes one think, "if anyone is a part of the leisure class, it's James Franco." These types of thoughts are ideal for those who practice conspicuous consumption and leisure, because the ultimate goal is higher repute in society.

Veblen also touches upon the idea that ownership is a practice of the high leisure class and a good method of being conspicuously wealthy. Although not quite ownership, Franco's multiple academic degrees are his to own and do with what he wishes, and Veblen's three incentives for ownership translate into incentives for obtaining so many degrees. Being so scholarly 1) allows Franco to be dominant (at least intellectually) 2) is evidence of his prowess and 3) is useful if his acting career cannot sustain him in the long-run.

Wealthy people can show their pecuniary strength through conspicuous leisure and consumption, which all entail that their actions are unproductive to society. Franco's scholarly exploits serve no greater purpose other than his own interests. Other celebrities and wealthy people have found a way to show their fiscal prowess and power through acts that are productive to society: charity. Although not as productive as being a blue-collar worker, as Veblen says, acts of charity by the wealthy contribute to the greater good and produce a positive effect on a context larger than just that of the wealthy.


Information for this post regarding James Franco was obtained from Wikipedia.org. 

Loyalty Beyond Reason

As I was watching the Frontline special The Persuaders, I heard and was immediately enthralled by the comment "loyalty beyond reason," which was used to describe consumers' attraction to certain successful brands. At the same time I was still mentally distraught by the loss of my all-time favorite sports team, the Pittsburgh Steelers. These two thoughts merged together to form a single question: Why do I feel such a strong connection between me and the Pittsburgh Steelers?
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/19/sports/football/19afc.html?_r=1

The Steelers are a brand and, as much as it pains me to say, have the intent of making enormous profits through advertising, merchandise and marketing techniques targeted at consumers, a.k.a. fans, such as myself. I've bought Steelers hats, jerseys, blankets, towels and even a snuggie, all because I love this football team, and for no other reason. 

Growing up in Pittsburgh, the Steelers are a huge part of everyday life. Black and yellow paraphernalia make up a large portion of Pittsburghers' wardrobes, so it's virtually impossible to escape the positive energy associated with the Steelers. And when football season rolls around, parties and events are thrown all around town, and everyone is somewhere watching or listening to the games. Every school in the city has Steelers spirit days, where every student and faculty member dresses up in preparation for the weekend's football game. 

The Steelers as a brand have done what all brands try to do, which is associate their brand with positive experiences and make people feel like they belong to something bigger than themselves. I cannot say what it would be like for a Pittsburgher to not be a Steelers fan, because I simply have never seen it happen. Everyone feels a necessity to be a part of Steeler Nation, and it is non-stop excitement (good or bad) when one is a part of it. 

So I have done my best to describe why I and many others are Steelers fans, but our loyalty still has no reasoning behind it. When you think about it, there is nothing logical about spending countless dollars and hours on a team of men that have no idea that I exist, who play a game that has no greater purpose than pure entertainment. But even after acknowledging my illogical love for the Steelers, I still have no problem being a Steelers fan because everyone around me growing up was a Steelers fan, and being a fan is better than not being a fan. 

This brand has incorporated itself so well into my life that even my own logical thought process can do nothing to falter my unreasonable loyalty. What I see as a fellow Steelers fan is actually advertising for the Steelers brand, which attracts upcoming fans and strengthens the loyalties of old ones. A normal Sunday gathering of friends and family around a TV screen, eating black and yellow chips, is a testament to the successful marketing of the Steelers brand. But none of this analysis can make a Steelers fan, or a fan of any team for that matter, question his/her loyalty to sports teams, because these pro-sporting brands have done such a good job of becoming entertainment, acceptance and a part of normal life for millions of people.

Wow, all this talk about the Steelers has me excited for next season. Go Stillers!

Jesus: The Worthiest Victim

Dichotomization is a word I had never heard before until quite recently. My understanding of dichotomization is admittedly quite limited, but I do know that, in the context of media, it describes the separation between worthy and unworthy victims. This knowledge has recently paired with the religious and philosophical questions frequenting my mental dialogue, and I have come to the conclusion that Jesus falls into the category of worthy victims and is the most notable, publicized and worthy victim of all time.

http://www.thecouragetolive.com/2010/11/10/consider-jesus-from-hebrews-121-3.html

I was raised Catholic and forced through Sunday school, where I learned quite a lot about the story of Jesus and other religious teachings. I attended a camp for 10 years founded and run by a church, and my lower year I took "The New Testament Perspective." So you could say that I have had my fair share of experiences with Christianity and more specifically Jesus' legacy. Time and time again I have seen the immense amount of media, such as the Bible, prayer books, films, etc., which all portray Jesus as a martyr for "the sins of the world." For millions upon millions of people, Jesus was a victim so that they would not have to be victims. 

Jesus' worthiness as a victim is shown through the large amounts of Bibles bought and sold every year, and the millions of churches scattered across the world. His name must be one of the most if not the most widely recognized name on the planet, and it is difficult to grow up and not here his story. I personally like to think of  Jesus' life and teachings as the longest covered media event to date. One can still see advertisements on TV or billboards along the highway preaching the name of Jesus, and his biography remains a number one best-seller, almost 2000 years after the (so called) fact.

This is just pure speculation on my part, but I cannot help but think that the Gospel was the product of the media equivalent of the time giving consumers the story they wanted to hear. Most people of the time were poor, and Jesus' teachings gave hope to these once unmotivated people. And if enough people start to believe that God came down as man and performed miraculous miracles, who is going to doubt its legitimacy?  

Writer's note: As of now I do not believe in God and the divine nature of Jesus: the larger and broader my knowledge of the world grows, the less I am able to believe that there are supernatural forces at work in my life. This kind of stuff has been on my mind a lot recently, and I thought I would use this "extra credit" blog as somewhat of an outlet for my many thoughts. All while retaining my identity as a media studies scholar, of course.