comments_imageCOMMENTS: 30

Buying In: The Secret Dialogue Between What We Buy and Who We Are

Rob Walker, author of a new book on consumer culture, explains how consumers embrace brands as part of their identities -- often without knowing it.
September 18, 2008  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 
Conventional wisdom says that today's savvy consumers are immune to marketing and unaffected by advertising. Rob Walker, the "Consumed" columnist for the New York Times Magazine, disputes that and says there is an important shift going on, which he calls "murketing" -- a blurring of the lines between marketing and everyday life. Rather than disappearing, he says, marketing is just harder to detect, and many consumers, rather than rejecting brands, are giving their own meaning to them and embracing them as part of their identity. In his new book, Buying In: The Secret Dialogue Between What We Buy and Who We Are, Walker writes about the intersection of identity and consumer culture, how marketers want us to think we're beyond advertising, and just how Pabst Blue Ribbon got so popular. AlterNet's Emily Wilson spoke to him by phone at his home in Savannah, Ga.

Emily Wilson: You say that a lot of people don't think of themselves as consumers and they reject corporate culture, so they think advertising doesn't affect them. You call that dangerous. Why?

Rob Walker: Well, I think it lulls you into a false security. Some people associate branding with just a logo. And they say "Well, I would never wear a logo on a T-shirt," and that's fine, but branding is more complicated than just a logo or a slogan; it's the process of attaching an idea to something. Often people who say they don't buy into corporate culture are hyper-aware of the brands they're buying -- it might be Tom's of Maine or whatever -- but they often have very specific opinions. Sometimes those choices are based on rational thinking, but sometimes they're based on assumptions or emotions, and it's hard to see that.

I talk in the book about my own experience with this with Nike and Converse. I was the kind of person much like the kind of person we're talking about. I thought, "Oh Nike, the swoosh, I would never do that." It wasn't until Nike bought Converse that I thought, "Oh, I've always worn Converse, what am I going to do?" There had never been a moment that I woke up and thought, "Oh, I am an outsider nonconformist." You don't think about those things consciously, but then suddenly something happens and you realize it's there, and supposedly I don't care about brands yet I'm having this big existential dilemma about what kind of shoes I'm going to wear because the meaning of them has changed.

EW: But you write about ethics being a factor in our consumer decisions. Wouldn't some people say that's about ethics because they don't want to support Nike?

RW: In some cases it is. But often it's a little bit selective. And to stick to my own hypocrisy: I tend to wear Levi's jeans, and what really is the difference between the production process of Levi's and Nike, and can I really defend myself on that? Not really. I run into that a lot.

People will kind of get their ethical hit from doing one type of consumer behavior and one brand they're really loyal to, something like fair trade coffee for example. And then they don't apply that in other (cases), and they don't really stop and ask any questions at all.

So I think this sort of attitude of "I'm above it all, and all my decisions are right" is the mind-set marketers want you to be in. They want to push your buttons, whether it's about ethics or whatever.

EW: You say there is a tension we have between wanting to be an individual and wanting to belong to something. How does that play out in the marketplace?

RW: I use the iPod as an example of something that serves different roles for different people. For some people, that is a very individualistic device with their personal soundtrack on it. And most analysis nowadays really focuses on how, as a culture, we're all into personalization and individualization and customization, and we all want to be different, but that is sort of overlooking this equally powerful urge, I think, which is to be part of something bigger than ourselves. So with a product, it's getting the one everyone has because it's the one to get. ... You can't really make a straight-faced case any more for the iPod as individualistic. I said in a column recently that owning an iPod is about as individual as the gray flannel suit.

EW: It was when you wrote about the Red Bull campaign that you coined the term "murketing." What was unique about that campaign?

RW: It was not known in the United States but was a big company overseas, and the traditional way for something like that to roll out through much of the 20th century has been to make a big noise. They weren't a start-up; they were a big company with a lot of resources coming into a new market with a new idea. So, usually, what you do is you take out ads and sell it and say, "Here's this new idea, and here's why you should buy it" and sort of explain yourself. As loudly as possible. They took a totally different approach. They did a lot of really small events, and they never really explained themselves. The full extent of the sell is it said "with taurine" on the can, and no one knew what taurine was, and that was sort of the mystique, as they would put it, of this stuff. And what you hear is to approach the influencers first, but they didn't really do that. They were approaching all kinds of different groups of people. Extreme sports people, club kids, college kids, people leaving gyms, people taking a break outside their office. That's kind of the opposite of traditional marketing, which is supposed to make clear what this is and who it's for. But by doing this small-scale thing, everyone thought it was for them, and I think they did it by being kind of vague and letting consumers fill in the blanks.

EW: You say that now the consumers are giving meaning to brands. Could you give an example of that?

RW: Well, in some ways, the Red Bull example. Another one is the Pabst Blue Ribbon example. That was one where that brand started to make a comeback after many decades of declining sales, and the company itself didn't really know what was going on or why. It was the cheap beer, and then people were embracing this idea that it was an underdog and wasn't insulting you with advertising. It was kind of anti. Embracing that was supposedly a statement against the mass beers. It gave it a kind of brand meaning that the company had nothing to do with. It was invented completely by consumers. There was never any kind of outsiderness or rebelliousness or nonconformity associated with Pabst. It was a poor example of a lot of what they were talking about because they had long since liquidated the factory and laid off the workers and subcontracted the brewing to someone else.

EW: You write that we think that, because of TiVo, we are in control and about how being able to click makes us feel that we have choices and that we're immune to marketing. You give examples of how people have been saying that the consumer is in control for years and years. So what sort of shift has technology made?

RW: Ever since there's been advertising, there have been people complaining about advertising, seeing through advertising, and mocking advertising. And advertisers get kind of upset about that, saying, "These consumers are such a pain in the ass; why can't they just do what we want them to do?" What's a little bit different in this go-round is that I think it's been embraced by the consumers themselves. That click gesture gives us a lot of feeling of control. And it does give us some control. There is some truth in that.

The thing is that marketers aren't dopes, and they didn't react to TiVo by saying, "Well, we're out of business." They reacted by saying, "We have to, once again, come up with new tactics and new modes," and as it happens, every single new piece of technology that comes along offers opportunities to them as well. With the possible exception of TiVo, I guess, but TiVo has been responded to. Just one example is the incredible spike of branded entertainment itself, of the brands moving into the shows.

The upshot is you see a campaign like the one that has built Axe deodorant, where they built Web sites and Web games that people interact with and forward to their friends. They created a fake girl group called the Bom Chicka Wah Wah Girls, which gets millions of views on YouTube and is just basically a long-form ad for Axe.

They dream up a concept for a television show called "Game Killers" that comes right out of a creative brief, and it gets picked up and becomes a show on MTV. So all of this technology presents interesting opportunities for marketers as well because, you know, they're doing their job and they're not fools, and in fact, they're very smart and creative people who are well paid to come up with solutions to these problems.

EW: How do you think this idea that we're in control plays out in other areas like politics?

RW: People will point to things like Facebook and text messaging and so on as grassroots -- empowering ways to spread ideas. It's hard for me to say. I heard this guy talking who was from a climate change group, and he was talking about how, in the '80s, the South African divestment movement came out of campuses all over the country, and that actually was pretty effective pressuring universities to divest from South Africa. It was kind of a social movement, and it had a real effect, and this guy was saying he was trying to recreate this with the issue of climate control.

There is something equivalent to that in joining a Facebook group that says "Save Darfur," and you put that in your Facebook profile. What do you actually do? Is that activism? Does it have an impact? I don't know. And if you've done it, do you feel like you've done a good deed or that you've participated in activism?

I think people are a little glib about a lot of this stuff. And they'll say, "Isn't it amazing that a political candidate or a social movement can connect with all these people." And it is amazing if it results in something changing. But it's not so amazing if it just means people feel like they've done something and not much has happened.

I'm not condemning Facebook, but I think the bottom line is it's still a little early to know if it going to lead to things happening in the world that we haven't seen happen, or is it going to lead to us sitting around clicking and feeling good about ourselves. I don't think it's known yet.

EW: You have a chapter in Buying In about the DIY/craft movement. What do you think is significant about that?

RW: Well, it's a rather large subculture of younger people kind of responding to their problems or questions or alienation from mass production culture with more material culture. They're sort of saying, "We'll make things ourselves," and then that leads to selling things ourselves. I think what's interesting about it is that there is something that ties into real behavior, wanting to know how it's made and what it's made of, and brings in some of these environmental or labor or ethical concerns. And I think what's interesting with the DIY world is they're selling things on Etsy for example, and people are drawn into Etsy for reasons that have nothing to do with those ethical concerns, but then once they get there, it becomes something they can maybe get engaged in.

I wouldn't call it a consumer movement. There's actually a history of very powerful movements that have led to really important things like food labeling and safety standards and so on. Those have tended to be led by what I would call more traditional terms of activism that are aimed at making change, not on an individual level, but one that benefits the greater good. The DIY world is much more capitalist, but it was the most hopeful movement I could see out there, where perhaps these marketing mechanisms can lead to at least different ways of thinking about consumer culture.

EW: In Buying In you write about the secret dialogue between marketers and consumers. How do you hope that dialogue might change after reading the book?

RW: Well, what I'm trying to do is pull back the curtain and say, Here's how two things work: one, the marketing industry, and two, your mind. I call it a secret dialogue because there's a lot going on there that we sort of overlook. We think we understand, but we really don't.

And I believe we do, by and large, care about the impacts of our consumer decisions on our own lives and on the planet. In survey after survey, people will say they care about those things, but we don't really behave that way, so I hope this will let people be more equipped to make the decisions that are more satisfying to them.
Emily Wilson is a freelance writer and teaches basic skills at City College of San Francisco.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email


Comments are closed-

Old age: a cure for obsessive consumerism.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 18, 2008 1:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm now in my late sixties and while the end of life is approaching like a speeding bullet, it's nice not to require anything but basic creature comforts.

For the last 10 years or so, on my birthday and at Christmas, I told my wife and kids the same thing: "Honest, guys, I don't need a thing and there's nothing that I want."

The gifts that please me most are the inexpensive kind that show a lot of thought and love on the giver's part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Negative effects of advertising.
Posted by: colinmeister on Sep 18, 2008 3:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder how many people are like me, and will actively avoid buying a product, even one they have used for years, because they feel their intelligence is being insulted by an advertisement?

I used to drink Budweiser almost every day, then one year I was flipping through the TV channels on Superbowl day when I happened to catch an advertisement featuring the "Bud bowl", with animated bottles of Budweiser and Bud Light playing some kind of sport. I thought this was so stupid, I havn't drank a Budweiser since. That must have been about 15 years ago.

I usually take the opportunity to find out what else is on TV when the ads come on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Supporting the News
Posted by: Urstrly on Sep 18, 2008 4:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love my TiVO cause I can zip through the ads (but not delete them, unfortunately). What makes me angry is how much of actual programming time they eat up. It seems to shrink every year. I can watch two Daily Shows in the time it takes one to run with commercials. The ad time even on PBS is greater than I would like.

The question is, how do we pay for the media we like—reporting especially—without the ads? The whole economic model is built around advertizing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Supporting the News Posted by: Tat106

Comments are closed-

poverty: another great cure for consumerism
Posted by: EMB on Sep 18, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right now I can't afford to purchase anything that isn't used or deeply discounted. I'm planning to continue my thrifty lifestyle even when my finances improve. I am so far out of the logo loop that I also don't feel any product envy. I just look for decent quality regardless of brand. With clothing style, I am sticking with basic timeless stuff. I am also "green" by default: reusing as much as possible and keeping my energy bills to a minimum. My computer, TV and Lamp are on a power strip that I unplug when leaving the house. I don't use an airconditioner- just wear less clothing when it's hot. I don't have a car and walk/ride a bike instead. In my apartment building people pass along books to eachother by donating and borrowing and re-donating them to the bookshelves in the lobby. I'm so accustomed to preparing all meals at home from scratch I cannot find it in me to pay anyone four dollars for a sandwich or more for a dinner when I can cook it better at home, for less. I still have half a dozen poland spring water bottles (free at a former job) that I keep in my fridge and refill with tap-water. All baggies get washed and reused. I wish I had a garden. I don't pine for the latest gucci bag.
With this economy I expect more people to find themselves in my situation. The disconnect between the wealthy lifestyles glamorized in advertising and the reality of our situation will become more apparent to more people. I hope more community awareness and cooperation will come of this. In my blue collar neighborhood a group of (definitely not yuppie) locals are starting a food coop. The main focus is saving money and it may evolve to emphasize locally grown produce, as a way to help our neighbors and reduce shipping costs. "Green" as a by-product of thrift with a healthy disregard for advertising...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Otto .
Posted by: otto on Sep 18, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Takes me back to Vance Packard and his book, THE HIDDEN PERSUADERS, in the 50's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Otto . Posted by: VZEQICVA

Comments are closed-

Hum
Posted by: solrev on Sep 18, 2008 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I use to drink PBR mainly because Bud gave me a headache. Now I drink Miller Lite because Bud still gives me a headache. I wore Levi’s because you could roll them up one cuff and split the seam and create a pinstripe. You could not hang with us cool guys without the pinstripe. Come to think of it, I do not have a clue what this guy is talking about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The Brainwashing is Out of Control
Posted by: Spyder on Sep 18, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The corporate brainwashing of America has been out of control now for half a century, but most of the public seems to have no intention of facing this reality. Stupidity has reigned over intelligence for so long that it has become the norm.

How did we get this way?

A History of Our Consumerism

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The World Has Become An Enormous Cauldron of Evil
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 18, 2008 7:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The so-called "Christmas" and "New Year" holidays and birthdays have all been turned into tournaments of commercial greed, so I shun them all. Even if I was rich I would give to people who really need help, like the homeless people I can see, not the clients of racketeering charities. This society has degenerated into a madhouse of selfish gluttony and the less I have to do with it the better I feel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What a relief. . .
Posted by: stevehamlin on Sep 18, 2008 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a relief that none of this applies to politics...

especially at the Presidential level.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» But it DOES apply to politics! Posted by: IntnsRed
» I am a constitution voter! Posted by: logansafi

Comments are closed-

Conservatives love consumerism and yet they HATE consumer rights and protections.
Posted by: GrantBurkeVT on Sep 18, 2008 10:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No surprise though since they always want to get those corporate profits propped up any way they can with no regards or respect to the safety of the consumers who give them the money to do so. And they want rampant consumerism to go on so that they can easily blame the consumers for everything regardless. Conservatives have been the biggest forces of socializing poverty and terrorism and enough is enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Consumerism
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 18, 2008 10:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"as a culture, we're all into personalization and individualization and customization, and we all want to be different, but that is sort of overlooking this equally powerful urge, I think, which is to be part of something bigger than ourselves." The American people bought into Reagan's " rugged individualism like a fish to water! Yes, he wasn't the only politician to sing that song,Madison Ave. and their slick ad's didn't hurt, neither do the idiot tv shows- where everyone is rich, beautiful, and consumptive but no one ever seems to work! Listen to the corporate news and it's all about celebrity, reality tv -just as bad, yet the ratings for these shows are thru the roof which is why they continue unabated! As individuals we instinctively know this mad consumerism, brand name, what I own attitude is bad, yet in our separatist, me first, I'm not as bad off as you are, culture there can be no denial that we are consumed with consumerism!

Unfortunately, it has to take tough times for everyone, before anyone notices! Maybe now the American people will take the blinders of divisive politics, gender/race/class inequality, and culture wars, for the American people to find our collective way out of the dark, stagnant, individualistic road that we have gone down and take that higher road that we profess to love!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

pretentious advertising
Posted by: cyr3n on Sep 18, 2008 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about "your face belongs to noxema" and "sleepys.. trust sleepys for the rest of your life"

I'd NEVER buy these products because their slogans are so creepy. The first one evokes images of some kind of face-cloning factory.. where once you buy their $hit, your face is now property of some corporate megloculture. And sleepy's.. jesus.. where to begin. First of all its a company where you're haggling constantly for a better bargain. If you trusted them in the first place, would you even be haggling? No. The price would confidently be the best value. So they fail on that mark. Secondly, "for the rest of your life".. A cheap mattress doesn't generally last longer than 5 years. So they jinxing you now to die a premature death from mattress-coil-tetnus? And then there's the obvious, give-us-your-money-forever undertone.

Yup. creepy. do not want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

As oil production peaks out, the products we buy, most of which are oil manufactured, will be
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 18, 2008 5:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
more expensive and scarcer in quantity. When the companies that rely on consumer sales big time are forced to sell less in quantity, it will first be expononentially higher prices followed by TOTAL BANKRUPTCIES !

GOD IS WILL ESCALATE THE SEVERE PUNISHMENT ON AMERICA TO ETERNAL DAMNATION FOR BEING A GREEDY PIGSHIT CONSUMERIST SOCIETY AND ALLOWING WARS FOR OIL TO FEED THEIR CONSUMERIST PIGSHIT WAYS !!! RRRRRRRAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRR !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

RE: what you buy is what you are.
Posted by: Dboy on Sep 18, 2008 10:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what you buy is what you are

If you closely identify with the things you buy, then this could be true. But I think you are really only describing the values where you live. It doesn't have to be that way. Things are a prison.

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Old age: a cure for obsessive consumerism.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 18, 2008 1:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm now in my late sixties and while the end of life is approaching like a speeding bullet, it's nice not to require anything but basic creature comforts.

For the last 10 years or so, on my birthday and at Christmas, I told my wife and kids the same thing: "Honest, guys, I don't need a thing and there's nothing that I want."

The gifts that please me most are the inexpensive kind that show a lot of thought and love on the giver's part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Negative effects of advertising.
Posted by: colinmeister on Sep 18, 2008 3:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder how many people are like me, and will actively avoid buying a product, even one they have used for years, because they feel their intelligence is being insulted by an advertisement?

I used to drink Budweiser almost every day, then one year I was flipping through the TV channels on Superbowl day when I happened to catch an advertisement featuring the "Bud bowl", with animated bottles of Budweiser and Bud Light playing some kind of sport. I thought this was so stupid, I havn't drank a Budweiser since. That must have been about 15 years ago.

I usually take the opportunity to find out what else is on TV when the ads come on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Supporting the News
Posted by: Urstrly on Sep 18, 2008 4:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love my TiVO cause I can zip through the ads (but not delete them, unfortunately). What makes me angry is how much of actual programming time they eat up. It seems to shrink every year. I can watch two Daily Shows in the time it takes one to run with commercials. The ad time even on PBS is greater than I would like.

The question is, how do we pay for the media we like—reporting especially—without the ads? The whole economic model is built around advertizing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Supporting the News Posted by: Tat106

Comments are closed-

poverty: another great cure for consumerism
Posted by: EMB on Sep 18, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right now I can't afford to purchase anything that isn't used or deeply discounted. I'm planning to continue my thrifty lifestyle even when my finances improve. I am so far out of the logo loop that I also don't feel any product envy. I just look for decent quality regardless of brand. With clothing style, I am sticking with basic timeless stuff. I am also "green" by default: reusing as much as possible and keeping my energy bills to a minimum. My computer, TV and Lamp are on a power strip that I unplug when leaving the house. I don't use an airconditioner- just wear less clothing when it's hot. I don't have a car and walk/ride a bike instead. In my apartment building people pass along books to eachother by donating and borrowing and re-donating them to the bookshelves in the lobby. I'm so accustomed to preparing all meals at home from scratch I cannot find it in me to pay anyone four dollars for a sandwich or more for a dinner when I can cook it better at home, for less. I still have half a dozen poland spring water bottles (free at a former job) that I keep in my fridge and refill with tap-water. All baggies get washed and reused. I wish I had a garden. I don't pine for the latest gucci bag.
With this economy I expect more people to find themselves in my situation. The disconnect between the wealthy lifestyles glamorized in advertising and the reality of our situation will become more apparent to more people. I hope more community awareness and cooperation will come of this. In my blue collar neighborhood a group of (definitely not yuppie) locals are starting a food coop. The main focus is saving money and it may evolve to emphasize locally grown produce, as a way to help our neighbors and reduce shipping costs. "Green" as a by-product of thrift with a healthy disregard for advertising...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Otto .
Posted by: otto on Sep 18, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Takes me back to Vance Packard and his book, THE HIDDEN PERSUADERS, in the 50's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Otto . Posted by: VZEQICVA

Comments are closed-

Hum
Posted by: solrev on Sep 18, 2008 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I use to drink PBR mainly because Bud gave me a headache. Now I drink Miller Lite because Bud still gives me a headache. I wore Levi’s because you could roll them up one cuff and split the seam and create a pinstripe. You could not hang with us cool guys without the pinstripe. Come to think of it, I do not have a clue what this guy is talking about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The Brainwashing is Out of Control
Posted by: Spyder on Sep 18, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The corporate brainwashing of America has been out of control now for half a century, but most of the public seems to have no intention of facing this reality. Stupidity has reigned over intelligence for so long that it has become the norm.

How did we get this way?

A History of Our Consumerism

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The World Has Become An Enormous Cauldron of Evil
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 18, 2008 7:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The so-called "Christmas" and "New Year" holidays and birthdays have all been turned into tournaments of commercial greed, so I shun them all. Even if I was rich I would give to people who really need help, like the homeless people I can see, not the clients of racketeering charities. This society has degenerated into a madhouse of selfish gluttony and the less I have to do with it the better I feel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What a relief. . .
Posted by: stevehamlin on Sep 18, 2008 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a relief that none of this applies to politics...

especially at the Presidential level.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» But it DOES apply to politics! Posted by: IntnsRed
» I am a constitution voter! Posted by: logansafi

Comments are closed-

Conservatives love consumerism and yet they HATE consumer rights and protections.
Posted by: GrantBurkeVT on Sep 18, 2008 10:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No surprise though since they always want to get those corporate profits propped up any way they can with no regards or respect to the safety of the consumers who give them the money to do so. And they want rampant consumerism to go on so that they can easily blame the consumers for everything regardless. Conservatives have been the biggest forces of socializing poverty and terrorism and enough is enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Consumerism
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 18, 2008 10:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"as a culture, we're all into personalization and individualization and customization, and we all want to be different, but that is sort of overlooking this equally powerful urge, I think, which is to be part of something bigger than ourselves." The American people bought into Reagan's " rugged individualism like a fish to water! Yes, he wasn't the only politician to sing that song,Madison Ave. and their slick ad's didn't hurt, neither do the idiot tv shows- where everyone is rich, beautiful, and consumptive but no one ever seems to work! Listen to the corporate news and it's all about celebrity, reality tv -just as bad, yet the ratings for these shows are thru the roof which is why they continue unabated! As individuals we instinctively know this mad consumerism, brand name, what I own attitude is bad, yet in our separatist, me first, I'm not as bad off as you are, culture there can be no denial that we are consumed with consumerism!

Unfortunately, it has to take tough times for everyone, before anyone notices! Maybe now the American people will take the blinders of divisive politics, gender/race/class inequality, and culture wars, for the American people to find our collective way out of the dark, stagnant, individualistic road that we have gone down and take that higher road that we profess to love!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

pretentious advertising
Posted by: cyr3n on Sep 18, 2008 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about "your face belongs to noxema" and "sleepys.. trust sleepys for the rest of your life"

I'd NEVER buy these products because their slogans are so creepy. The first one evokes images of some kind of face-cloning factory.. where once you buy their $hit, your face is now property of some corporate megloculture. And sleepy's.. jesus.. where to begin. First of all its a company where you're haggling constantly for a better bargain. If you trusted them in the first place, would you even be haggling? No. The price would confidently be the best value. So they fail on that mark. Secondly, "for the rest of your life".. A cheap mattress doesn't generally last longer than 5 years. So they jinxing you now to die a premature death from mattress-coil-tetnus? And then there's the obvious, give-us-your-money-forever undertone.

Yup. creepy. do not want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

As oil production peaks out, the products we buy, most of which are oil manufactured, will be
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 18, 2008 5:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
more expensive and scarcer in quantity. When the companies that rely on consumer sales big time are forced to sell less in quantity, it will first be expononentially higher prices followed by TOTAL BANKRUPTCIES !

GOD IS WILL ESCALATE THE SEVERE PUNISHMENT ON AMERICA TO ETERNAL DAMNATION FOR BEING A GREEDY PIGSHIT CONSUMERIST SOCIETY AND ALLOWING WARS FOR OIL TO FEED THEIR CONSUMERIST PIGSHIT WAYS !!! RRRRRRRAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRR !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

RE: what you buy is what you are.
Posted by: Dboy on Sep 18, 2008 10:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what you buy is what you are

If you closely identify with the things you buy, then this could be true. But I think you are really only describing the values where you live. It doesn't have to be that way. Things are a prison.

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS