November 16, 2004

seth on “branding is dead”

aaa12345693.jpg
Yep, this made my day: Seth Godin, one of my favo­rite wri­ters (online and off) joins in the “Bran­ding Is Dead” debate. Gaping­void gets a wee men­tion (Thanks, Seth!):

3. There’s a dif­fe­rence bet­ween brands and bran­ding. Brands exist whether you want them to or not. Brands aren’t going to go away any time soon. Brands are a use­ful shorthand for a com­pli­ca­ted asset within an orga­ni­za­tion. Bran­ding, on the other hand, is a thing you do. And as an acti­vity, bran­ding is pro­ble­ma­tic. Bran­ding is ill-defined, usually vacuous, often expen­sive and totally unpre­dic­ta­ble. I’m happy to say that you shouldn’t grow up to be someone who does branding.

Agreed. I said “Bran­ding is dead”, not “Brands are dead”.
[BONUS LINK:] Great thoughts on the same sub­ject by the ever-wonderful Evelyn Rodri­guez:

Another hint: Don’t look for books to por­tend the future of brands. Or the future of anything for that mat­ter. The unfur­ling edge of the unfol­ding future is being revea­led in the real world all around us (observe!) and, secon­da­rily, recor­ded within blogs, daily and monthly media. A book takes 12 – 18 months to publish after it’s writ­ten (and that’s after you’ve writ­ten the pro­po­sal, found an agent, con­den­sed all your thoughts and research into cohe­sive drafts and revi­sed the drafts and sub­mit­ted to your edi­tor and…) 

Reminds me of a story: Some clever-dicky jour­na­list type once asked a great Jazz musi­cian (it may have been The­lo­nious Monk, but I’m not sure) where he thought “Jazz was going.”
The musi­cian replied, “If I knew where Jazz was going, I’d already be there.”

8 Responses to “seth on “branding is dead””

  1. Alex Lam says:

    Hi Hugh,
    BTW, just heard on ITconversation’s Gill­mor Gang ses­sion that men­tio­ned your site and busi­ness card dra­wing. It’s around 40 mins in and was brought up when someone men­tio­ned seeing hilia­rious busi­ness cards with dra­wings.
    Thought you’d want to know!

  2. hugh macleod says:

    Cool, Alex =)
    Do you have the link? Let me know and I’ll blog it.
    Heh.

  3. Tom says:

    What a great quote from Monk, one of the grea­test musi­cians of the 20th cen­tury.
    Thanks.

  4. Craiger says:

    I’m an illus­tra­tor, and when I went free­lance a few years ago, I ended up with seve­ral marketing/communications firms as regu­lar clients. Within these com­pa­nies, the terms “brand” and “bran­ding” were tos­sed around very casually, and were see­mingly appli­ca­ble to everything.
    Des­pite trying to read as much as pos­si­ble (inc­lu­ding a lot of the info pro­vi­ded here), I feel I’m still at a loss to unders­tand what the heck “brand” means these days. In my busi­ness, it seems 95% of the peo­ple who use the word drop it mainly as jar­gon to sound current and infor­med (without neces­sa­rily kno­wing what it means for them­sel­ves or their clients).
    I rea­lize I’m a rela­tive new­bie to the world of mar­ke­ting, so hope­fully this kind of thing will get a little clea­rer as time goes on. Right now it appears that anything and everything can con­cie­vably be a brand.
    Any­way, thanks to ever­yone here for trying to shed some light on this stuff. Much appreciated.

  5. Tom Norian says:

    “Bran­ding” today might mean kee­ping your pro­ducts and ser­vi­ces focus­sed on your goals for your pro­duct.
    In the past it might have meant “make our cus­to­mer Think this” but I’d give a bit more cre­dit now for many peo­ple using the word.
    If Brand is your repu­ta­tion, and repu­ta­tion is based upon what aspects of your pro­duct you aim to be the best at, the act of “Bran­ding” can be said to make sure that your keep your pro­ducts, and mar­ke­ting “on topic”.
    The old “who are we, and are we doing what we say we are?”
    If your brand is a “rolex” watch, and your pro­duct aim to be: “a fine qua­lity watch made with high qua­lity jewelry mate­rials that gene­rally have a spor­tier fla­vor than a pia­get”, bran­ding might inc­lude the pac­ka­ging and adver­ti­sing of the brand as well as reig­ning in on desig­ners that might want to spread the brand into plas­tics on one side or more deli­cate sty­les on the other.
    The “Bran­ding” is the act of focus­sing design decis­sions as well as the mar­ke­ting and pac­ka­ging of what you make.
    Bran­ding means sta­ying on mes­sage with pro­duct and pre­sen­ta­tion.
    Does that mean that peo­ple will pay more for your pro­duct? That was the past con­cept, but making a supe­rior pro­duct isn’t always enough, you must have your pro­duct con­si­de­red. If bran­ding keeps you well regar­ded in the niche you’re after, its far from dead.
    But if “bran­ding” meant selling a buick as a mercedes…yeah thats not going to work. Its not about mis­lea­ding but about con­sis­tency of message.

  6. What’s bran­ding?

  7. Tim Kitchin says:

    Brands are just the ves­sels of mea­ning.
    Bran­ding is really dead sim­ple.
    It is the com­plex pro­cess by which pro­fes­sio­nals try to get us to asso­ciate con­sis­tent posi­tive fee­lings with wha­te­ver ‘thing’ they’re ‘bran­ding’.
    That ‘thing’ can be a pro­duct, a cor­po­ra­tion, a country, and ideo­logy, a service,whatever.
    The so called ‘War on Terror’ is an attempt to mani­pu­late minds by bran­ding US foreign policy.
    So is bran­ding dead? Of course not. It’s a mas­sive growth industry. BUT it is strug­gling to create any impact amidst cri­ti­cal, enligh­te­ned and info-empowered brand users.
    The argu­ment that bran­ding must become a whole-organisation affair, based upon con­sis­tent expe­rien­ces is well rehear­sed by bookds like Love­marks and Beyond Bran­ding.
    But there’s a dee­per truth here that still gets mis­sed.
    Flip the bran­ding con­cept and con­si­der it from the point of view of the vic­tim, not the assas­sin. We, the peo­ple, own these brands. They only exists in our heads…
    Bran­ding, pro­perly unders­tood is the pro­cess by which com­mu­ni­ties reach com­mon con­sen­sus around the mea­ning of a named idea.
    It is an orga­nic pro­cess of per­so­nal con­tex­tual fra­ming. (Did I just write that?)
    Brands exist inside users’ heads, not in design manuals. And try as you might, you lovely brand peo­ple, you can­not con­trol our thoughts.
    As human beings, we have a right, and even a duty to steal the brands that truly mat­ter to us, and rede­fine them as we wish.
    If BT comes to mean ‘Bloody Terri­ble’ ser­vice, the orga­ni­sa­tion will have to change.
    The best bran­ding folk can hope for is to lead them to the water. Then hope we don’t spit it right back at them.