Advertising strategies and consumer impact

Advertisnig

Advertising

Branding ourselves to death: Branding and the modern American identity in 'entertainment' brand-specific stores

Branding ourselves to death: Branding and the modern American identity in 'entertainment' brand-specific stores

What do you think when you see someone riding in a car that proudly displays a bumper sticker reading: "My other car is a Harley?" Media critic James B, Twitchell would likely shake his head and sigh, noting how the corporate giant was getting advertising through a bumper sticker that the driver had paid for -- with his (or her) own dime. Nina Diamond, Mary Ann McGrath, Albert Muniz, Stefania Borghini, and Robert Kozinets of the Journal of Marketing might counter that the consumer was 'getting something' from the experience of buying and using the bumper sticker, namely the access to a cultural identity as a Harley Davidson consumer.

Twitchell would see such a status as a manufactured identity. But in their 2009 article "American Girl and the brand Gestalt: Closing the loop on sociocultural branding research," Diamond (et al.) states that consumers are never merely the passive recipients of marketing, rather they use marketing images for their own purposes. For example, "in Harley Davidson stores… women who ride Harley-Davidson motorcycles subvert the hyper-masculinity that is integral to the brand, as well as female gender stereotypes, to create meanings" that challenge American gender norms and the brand norm in conjunction by using the tropes of Harley Davidson in an ironic fashion, often paired with hyper-feminine gear (Diamond et al. 2009, p. 120).

"There is really no great difference between Evian and Mountain Spring, Colgate and Crest, Miller and Budweiser, Ford and Chevrolet," argues James Twitchell in his essay "But First a Word from our Sponsors." What is 'different' is the advertising, and the branding of such products. America has given consumers an array of inexpensive goods and little else than an array of homogenized identities that can be bought (Twitchell 2009, p. 560). In support of such ideas, it is true that it sometimes seems as if the smaller the difference between rival brands, such as Coke vs. Pepsi, the more passionate an American consumer's brand loyalties are likely to be. Even more insidious, says Twitchell, is how major brands have gotten us to do part of the work of the service ourselves (like busing our own tables at McDonald's and pumping our own gas at Exxon) while the price we pay for enjoying this brand increases.

Twitchell portrays a world where marketers are in perpetual search of new markets, a world driven by branding in everything from radio, to television, to the Internet. But it could be argued that consumers are not simply ignoring advertising -- in some cases, they are soliciting it. TiVo and DVR allow consumers to edit out advertising content in a way they were unable to in the past. Yet consumers are paying to advertise brands in addition to the paying for products themselves: this can be seen in everything from people wearing M&M t-shirts to buying Coca-Cola bears as Christmas presents, despite the growth of corporate sponsorship in every facet of modern life. Clearly, they feel that the brand 'says' something about 'them' and have yet to reach the super-saturation level one might expect.

In the particular phenomenon explored in the Diamond article, marketers have taken this one step further by creating brand store 'experiences.' This began with the Disney store, but has since fanned out to include new brands such as American Girl, where the target consumer (a middle school girl) and her mother can watch plays featuring the brand's dolls, eat at the American Girl cafe, and buy paraphernalia pertaining to the doll. "Brilliantly designed and executed, American Girl Place consists of three sales floors, comprising 35,000 square feet of back-to-the-future retroscape ambiance. Inside can be found museum-like dioramas, a theater, a cafe, a doll hair salon, and lounging areas designed to facilitate interaction among shoppers and the examination and use of products" (Diamond 2009, p.119).

Diamond et al. (2009) argues that entertainment brands, such as American Girl, the Disney store have a unique power as brands, not simply to encourage consumers to buy the product, but also to foster consumer creativity, and suggest that as a result identity exists in dialogue with the corporation, and is not merely manipulated by the seller. Consumers are crafting their own unique image as they choose, consciously, to 'brand' themselves. In these "themed flagship brand stores" offering "spectacular environments… far from being overwhelmed or coerced by the sign-rich context, consumers use the retail environment as a stage on which to perform, enthusiastically enacting the brand and cocreating the spectacle. Therefore, emplacement is reconceptualized as a shared endeavor, with the marketer ceding considerable freedom to consumers" (Diamond 2009, 120).

At American Girl stores, families are crafting a multigenerational experience of sharing idealized images of girls long past. The product alone is not the point, rather in buying the product an 'experience' is conveyed that is enjoyed and expanded upon at the store. The girl engages in creative play with the doll that is enhanced through the books, not closed off. Of course, it could be argued that American Girl offers a highly directive play experience: instead of truly old-fashioned girls who made clothing for their dolls, girl consumers buy dolls from the manufacturer. The books direct the narrative of the dolls, rather than leave the doll's lives open-ended. And parents are clearly buying "a moral salve for a culture whose conception of girlhood was often painfully at odds with girls' -- and mothers' -- day-to-day experience" (Diamond et al. 2009, p.122). American Girl is the 'anti-Barbie' and 'anti-Bratz doll' and marketed as such.