Totalitarian brands

An article that every brand builder should read is Branding Youth in the Totalitarian State in Design Observer. The article is based on Steven Heller’s new book: Iron Fists: Branding the Totalitarian State.

The article raises all sorts of interesting questions about the relationships between propaganda and brands, and on the “totalitarian” nature of brands themselves.

  1. Are brands a form of propaganda?
  2. How are brands different from propaganda?
  3. Are the best brands “totalitarian” in concept and in execution?
  4. Is every brand builder a closet fascist, inventing a new world order for customers?
  5. What are the strategy downsides of brands conceived and executed as propaganda? What other brand models could disrupt them?

I’ll tackle these questions bit by bit in coming posts.

Two brand models: containment vs liberation

As part of this discussion maybe we can assess different models of brands, among them a persuasion or propaganda model, and a contrasting liberation model. A persuasion or propaganda model would try to shape customer thoughts and feelings so as to contain customers, to keep them in place so they continue to be “loyal” to the brand and purchase the product.

In contrast, a liberation model of brands might aim to free customers to be more proactive for themselves, on the premise that greater sales will flow from a more proactive culture, where customers are active players in product development rather than a passive audience. (This model assumes a company can lead by innovation into a proactive culture, and that can be a very risky assumption.)

Two previous posts along these lines:

Totalitarian brands—and brand builders

To a certain extent, every brand builder has a totalitarian mindset. (Yes, admit it.) We conceive of a “total” unified and integrated brand experience where the brand identity is carefully composed and actively expressed. We make sure that every symbol, slogan, color, theme, touchpoint, etc. is set forth to maximize the brand effect. Behind every logo is a torchlight parade.

Personally, I tend to be a super-totalitarian in this regard, but I always have to ask myself: does this approach leave sufficient room for the customer? Since we’re trying to build the brand through the customer, shouldn’t we also focus on building customers themselves so their freedoms can create new markets for us?

Limits of a totalitarian brand strategy

Some questions: Can a brand be too totalitarian? Does a totalitarian approach create passive customers who are a dead end strategically? Can we build a totalitarian brand from the bottom up? Does a totalitarian brand just hold customers back? Or can it set them free?

More to come.

NOTE: See also the Youth under fascism site, which is the source of the poster above.

2 Responses to “Totalitarian brands”

  1. Sasha Strauss Says:

    Brian,

    Exceptional concepts. We’ve always used the deplorable Third Reich as an example of one of the most well executed brand strategies in history. Despite our disgust for their brand promise, they managed to unify “consumers” under a single value proposition, engage stakeholders literally until death and instill paralyzing fear in the competition. If they weren’t so overly aggressive with their market share pursuits, we’d be having a much different conversation right now.

    Best,
    Sasha

    sasha strauss
    Managing Director

    Innovation Protocol
    Strategic Brand Development

  2. Brian Phipps Says:

    Sometime soon I hope to have a post that clearly differentiates brands from propaganda, though I suspect it may have to include some sort of sliding scale.

Leave a Reply