Brands and Identity

August 12th, 2006 by Mike

Charlie O’Donnell of Oddcast has a thoughtful post about the changing dynamics in branding and marketing that are afoot. According to Charlie:

When the brands woke up from being dazed, it seemed that they began to like us… to want to get closer to us. They wanted to be in our networks, to be friends with us.

At first, I started calling this phenomenon “Brand Association.” The things I buy wanted to be closer to me.

Then I realized that, even more than that, they wanted to be me, and me to be them… and to a large extent, I am them. I don’t drink, so when I’m out at bars, I’m Sprite guy. Its become a running joke, but ask any of my friends who they think of when they see a Sprite, its probably me. I am a Mustang and Jamba Juice, and Macy’s, too… I am self identifying with a number of brands. I have a relationship with brands that I am committing a part of myself to.

At first this sounded scary, reminiscent of Single White Female (Allie’s new room-mate is about to borrow a few things without asking. Her clothes. Her boyfriend. Her life).

Charlie notes that lifestyle marketing is not new, but that he is seeing a new trend where brands are “opening up and becoming vulnerable to form a stronger tie to consumers.” I struggled with the notion of a brand becoming “vulnerable.” It makes me think of lovers sharing intimate secrets with one another in a quiet whisper.

But he is on to something here. Brands have lost control. The dynamic has shifted. Brands once managed the terms of their relationships with consumers. You were cool because you wore Guess Jeans (do they still make those?). But that model is quickly being tossed out the window. A brand is now only as influential as its consumers. In that sense, brands are extremely vulnerable. You are no longer what you wear. But what you wear (the brand) is increasingly becoming you.

Charlie has come up with an interesting term for what he sees as a blurring of one’s own identity, brand association, consumption, and the like. He calls it “MeVertising.”

6 Responses to “Brands and Identity”

  1. Christian Busch Says:

    Brands try to associate themselves with customers since well…. the beginning of sales relationships and interactions. The first person who really broke a lot of ground on this new relationship between customers and companies was Seth Godin (www.sethgodin.com) - you should check out his stuff on this.

  2. Mike Oliver Says:

    Thanks for the comment Christian. Seth is a daily read for me. And your right, he has some great insights into this.

  3. {mikeoliver.org} » Blog Archive » Vulnerable Marketing Says:

    [...] A few posts ago, I talked about how I struggled with Charlie’s use of the word vulnerable in reference to the relationships that are evolving between brands and their consumers. I was reading Tara Hunt’s wonderful blog this morning and lo and behold, she too used the word vulnerable in reference to marketing. I can honestly say that I never associated the word vulnerable with marketing, branding, advertising, and the like, before this past wekeend, but I am beginning to like it. [...]

  4. Brand Me. Brand You. at Disruptive Thoughts Says:

    [...] You’re the uniting force. “A brand is now only as influential as its consumers.” [...]

  5. Test Says:

    Hi

    Bye

  6. "A brand is now only as influential as its consumers." at Inside Krasnodar Says:

    [...] quote in the title of this blog post comes from Mike Oliver who posted a blog entry “Brands and Identity” in response to one by Charlie [...]

Leave a Reply