In 'No Space,' "The Branding of Learning" chapter 4 is simply wonderful, especially for people still in school like myself. You'll read about grade school kids making Nike sneakers as "an educational experience" and a year-old student being suspended for wearing a Pepsi shirt on "Coke Day. Much of this probably won't be as shocking to you, but it's really pleasant to read it from somone on "the outside" that truly gets it. In "No Jobs," "The Discarded Factory" chapter 9 offers the same old shocking facts about sweatshop labour with a fresh perspective which only makes the situation seem worse.
The whole "No Logo" section is wonderful, with the exceptions stated above in "What's Bad? If you have been paying close attention to the big brands and some of their dubious business practices, much of the examples won't be news to you.
However, I still think you would enjoy the points that Klein raises and how she ties everything together into a well thought-out package. If you are like me and you're not as familiar with these events, this book is a must read. It will guide you through some of the events surrounding Nike, Disney, The Gap and other multinationals throughout the past decade and let you know where we stand today.
Students should especially like "No Space," especially with the commercialisation on campus and in the classroom. Purchase this book at Fatbrain. That's why I've never and I mean never bought a t-shirt that had a logo on it. I buy plain t-shirts the ones that are exactly the same as the expensive ones, except for not having logos and, well, not being expensive.
I do indeed own several shirts that have logos, but they were given to me free, as promotions, at my last job. I don't get angry at Tommy Hillfinger and Nike for selling hyperexpensive t-shirts I mock them and regard people using the logos on their clothes to assert social status and the people this works on as pathetic.
Woorden en Beelden
Status - Tokens of status are an integral part of society, every culture has them. A natural "pecking-order" come from status symbols.
- No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies - Naomi Klein - Google книги.
- The Science of Being Well?
- High-Tc Superconductors Based on FeAs Compounds.
Because the status afforded by certain brands is immediately apparent, the pecking-order can still be maintained by visual or some other sensory cues as it has for every species of every animal that exists in a social paradigm. Now, who doesn't want more sex?
Those who believe there is no nature in the nature v. All others must cede this argument. Utility - The difference between us and virtually all animals is that we find utility in our environment. Further, we believe that our cause or statement of status is just and right. Otherwise, why would we do it? Therefore, everything else is not as good. Necessity - somethings are subjective in this category ie email, car, house, phone, radio whereas others are objective food, water, air, exercise. These things we purchase what works--not what works best. This is not to say some people do not show status here.
It just means that people like me who excercise poorly, have a two-bit radio, and drink soda Do not do so for utility, but out of necessity. I eat for utility--sometimes for status ie Duck at Thanksgiving, swordfish steak, Chocolate Charlotte since I enjoy cooking. Enjoyment - Going to movies, renting movies, listening to music, watching TV, playing ball, etc.
Point out the utility of the object I gotta have this particular product because it is the best of its knid. Point out the status of the object I gotta have this product because look at all the half naked women Even women's ads feeature half naked or attractive women. The problem exists in "puffery. No puffery can exist in legal offers. Unfortunately, people on this website tend to be more educated in at least computers, et al. That means we tend to have a more logical thought process as opposed to imaginative.
Further, posters here tend to be more motivated. More motivation equals more research and, perhaps, a conscious. So we research more, apply logic more and are not easily duped by puffery. We, as slashdotters, are an extreme minority. Before I sign a new-car contract I specifically ensure that the following clause is added: "This contract will be considered null and void with no monetary loss to purchaser if dealer defaces car by affixing their dealer logo to vehicle in any form. They grumble a lot about it being their company policy, but no salesman will risk losing a commission over something so petty if you stick to your guns.
No, truly expensive and fasionable clothing has something perhaps better - wearers who will tell the name of the manufacturer to those who so much as look at the outfit. Just turn off the TV.
Have friends over and talk, play games, build relationships, etc. You can escape brand. If you choose to live in a heavily populated area just look around and see power lines and directional signs cluttering up just as much space as brand. We ignore them all and have trained ourselves to know which signs are important given our current context.
I'll bet that most of us do the same with brand icons.
- No Logo:Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies.
- Naomi Klein?
- Love Lust and Petty Crime.
- The Politics of Housing Booms and Busts (International Political Economy).
- No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies - Naomi Klein - Google книги?
- Bayesian Core: A Practical Approach to Computational Bayesian Statistics (Springer Texts in Statistics).
- The Dance of Politics: Gender, Performance, and Democratization in Malawi (African Soundscapes).
It's all wrapped up in the heavily-marketed concept of pseudo-individualism that so many people -- especially USians, it seems -- suck up. Gotta be yourself After ten? Better advertising through short-term memory. Seriously, if you are capable of ignoring advertisement and most of us are these days , then what Tiger Woods wears on his hat is completely irrelevent to you. Logo advertising and "branding" ads, from the Mickey Mouse shadow to last year's Gap ads featuring Luscious Jackson, are not made to sell us their stuff.
Pepsi and Coke are two of the biggest advertisers out there, but their ads don't ever get anybody to switch colas The real reason for these ads is to raise stock value. If a company seems to be omnipresent, investors get a warm, fuzzy feeling about buying shares in them. Nike is fully aware that you will not buy their shoes just to "be like Mike". A few suckers, maybe, but not most of us. Most people buy athletic gear based on things like comfort, fit, durability, and looks.
No Logo - Wikipedia
However, the myth of unwashed masses spending their lunch money on Air Jordans serves Nike very, very well. It creates the impression that they have a product that everybody is salavating for, which raises their market value. The irony is that pundits who rant about Nike paying Jordan big bucks to rip people off serves Nike's purpose, too. Wall Street types see these rants and say, "wow!
I gotta get in on that action! It's astounding how many people think that the "casual Friday" trend of the 90's was the result of workers refusing to wear ties and suit-coats every day, instead of clothes companies trying to sell more Dockers tm. I see these now on very scraggly individuals -- homeless and people in grunt jobs. One of the reasons to stay away from "branded" clothes is that anyone can wear them Paul Fussel wrote a great little book named Class. In it, he pointed out that people in the lower-middle to middle social class tends to wear larger logos, including things that say where they went on vacation Upper classes tend not to wear any logo-ed clothes since they had custom made clothes or had no need to promote themselves with such gaudyness.
No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies
The clever reader will have noted that I mentioned Fussell's schema had 12 classes, and I discussed the four lower classes, three middle classes and the four upper classes. The remaining class, "class X", of people who prefer to consider themselves outside the class system. The bohemians, if you will. These people who elect to wear clothing which gives neutral, mixed, or ambiguous class signs. However, by Fussell's paradigm, the fact that you managed to work mention of the three brands of T-shirt you value into a conversation of how you don't wear clothing with brands strongly suggests you possess that class insecurity common of people in the middle class.
Specifically, they mentioned the Volkswagon Beetle as one of the products behind introducing the "hippie" philosophy to the zeitgeist. Record companies and other medea corporations provided a lot of the drive as well. Gather any 10 "anti-corporate" Unix geeks at random, and 8 of them will be wearing Doc Martins. The rise of body piercing has created whole now markets for selling jewelry.
Homeopathy and "alternative medicine" rakes in millions by getting people to trust their herbalist more than their family doctor. The thesis of the book boiled down to the fact that there really is no revolution, but it is being marketed anyway. Personally, my objection is to being coerced into wearing what consitutes an advertisement, especially if I also have to pay a premium price for the garment.
Anything bigger than a Levi's hip pocket tag renders an item of cloting undesireable for me. Usually, I could care less what others are wearing, and I think it has actually become a statement to wear clothes that don't display any brandname or logo.
For the record, I do intentionally wear logos or trademarks of things I genuinely endorse, such as the EFF, User Friendly, or my own employer. But it's an honest choice, not a compliance with whatever fashion trend is mandated by my peers. But then there's the issue of being inundated with advertisements. I don't always empathize with this one, but I understand it well.
Some people feel that it cheapens any experience to see a brand name, logo, or sponsor's slogan displayed too prominently in connection with the event. Although in some events, like auto racing and soap operas, it has a long tradition. Being constantly subjected to people wearing unignorable brand names "Hilfiger" comes to mind is just another chip out of their lives' integrity.