This week we are looking at the intersection of culture and brands, or what brands come signify in a cultural context. Some brands take on broader meaning and identity value. There are several great blogs and books that have explored this theme. I especially like NYT's journalist, Rob Walker's book, "Buying In: The Secret Dialogue between what we Buy and Who We Are" and its companion blog, "Murketing" (in honor of the increasingly murky line between culture and marketing).
As marketers, the this intersection can result in 'iconic' brands. Doug Holt, author of "How Brands Become Icons" describes icons as "the person or the thing widely regarded as the most compelling symbol of a set of ideas or values that a society deems important.’ Holt describes how brands become iconic, by studying current and past iconic brands.
It's also interesting to take this understanding and reflect on what might be the iconic brands of the future. What brands are speaking into important cultural dialogs now and have the potential to become iconic? I am especially curious why so few Millennial generation-specific iconic brands have emerged . Most of the brands young adults like are the same ones the rest of the culture likes. See "Why Arent' There More Iconic Millennial Brands" for more of my musings on this subject)
What brands do you think have the potential to become iconic for adults currently 18-29? Or is the idea of a generation-specific iconic brand inconsistent with the whole idea of being an icon?
(You may want to check out this Post, "Millennials: Mapping Their Culture Code" and the referenced slide presentation by Tim Stock of ScenarioDNA:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
Keeping consistent with our generations' need to search on Wikipedia for 'the answers,' I searched what Wikipedia considered as cultural icons. Che Guevara, Jim Morrison, John Lennon, Bob Marley, The Beatles were the people listed who will remain "symbols of youth." What I find interesting is, below this information on the same page the authors have included a section on icons and brands stating that, "Brands can reflect societal values and changes, but many people have become weary of them. Many brands aspire to become cultural icons, but fail."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iconic
I would actually completely agree because I think that with brands, whether a consumer brand or a pop culture brand, their popularity can rise very quickly but can fall just as fast. When brainstorming specific brands that might become icons for our generation, stars like Brittany Spears and the cast of Harry Potter came to mind but then I realized that they were very quickly replaced by Lady Gaga and the cast of Twilight. I believe that in today's culture, the so-called 'popular' brand is too quickly replaced by the 'next best thing' to even reach the beginning of iconic status.
In fifteen years we will be able to identify those brands that are the past generation's icons but it is very difficult to identify those at this moment. The reason brands reach the 'iconic' status is because they weather the ups and downs of popularity and fight against 'the next best thing,' coming out on top as a brand that has withstood the test of time and is still extremely popular.
One of the things that stood out to me in our class discussion was the notion of 'discovery' of a brand. We talked about Anthropologie, but there's also an element of new restaurants, designers, vacation destinations, upcoming technology... With every answer at our fingertips (like Michelle pointed out), the opportunity to be first and have a brand as 'ours' first is incredibly appealing. It makes it iconic to us personally, and may only lose a portion of that iconic status once it gets bigger because you still had it 'first'.
As for iconic brands for our generation, we are ourselves our most iconic brand, and not just because Time Magazine told us so in 2006 with You: as the Person of the Year. Who better for us to be the first to 'discover' our brands? We adopt a combination of brand affiliations to bolster the individuality of our personal brand, instead of being defined solely by the brands we wear. We now like Lady Gaga because there's no one else like her, and shun N Sync and boy bands because there are a million copy cats.
Andy Warhol said everyone gets to be famous for 15 minutes. Social media has changed that, creating the opportunity for everyone's brand to be infamous within their social circles and beyond.
The definition of an icon given above--"the person or the thing widely regarded as the most compelling symbol of a set of ideas or values that a society deems important”—made me think, what does our generation deem important? As Michelle and Kate have stated, our generation seems to value instantaneous information and “the opportunity for everyone's brand to be infamous.” I love this and agree completely. When considering something in our society that does this, I immediately thought of Urbandictionary.com.
Urbandictionary,com embodies both of these values as it A) provides a space to access information about current and trendy language and B) allows the user to edit and/or add their own information and be cited for it, with links to your other insights. It’s tagline was written to resonate with our generation: “Urban Dictionary is the dictionary you wrote. Define your world.” It doesn’t get much more appealing to our generation than that.
I believe an icon does not need to span generations to be relevant or to be considered an icon. If a set of values is shared by a group and the group has a symbol that represents the embodiment of that set of values, I think that group has created an icon. Universal buy-in by all societies is not necessary.
Assuming we define an icon as "the person or the thing widely regarded as the most compelling symbol of a set of ideas or values that a society deems important", then it follows that the less defined a culture's predominant ideas & values are, the more difficult it will be to identify its icon(s). Pegging Gen Y to a single, overarching culture is difficult...and risky. In our modern age of social media and globalization, many different cultures can easily exist within the same geographic space. In the same way, the current proliferation of so many styles of music, TV shows, and other media offer a wide variety of "cultures" from which a member of any given generation can choose.
In other words, I believe there are many cultures within Gen Y, each currently with their own "mini icons." These come from an amazing quantity of messages, each competing for millennials' attention. Brands, movies, celebrities, music styles, books, causes, etc. all add to the noise. This makes it more difficult to discern what the overarching themes are that will define, in the eyes of history, what Gen Y stood for as a whole.
Overall, I think it's deceptive to view a generation as a cohesive enough culture for a single icon or group of icons to represent it. That said, I do believe certain icons will emerge. I didn't love the 4 choices in our online poll, but out of those I picked what I thought was an ironic choice for the 21st century...an 80's rock star, Bono.
It is interesting that the topic of iconic brands for the Millenial generation is today's discussion. I had to go to the main building to talk to Financial aid. On my way I had forgot my iPod that I frequently listen to while walking. I took the time to pay a little more attention to the people walking around me. I would have to say that 70-80% of them had a cell phone or earphones attached to their heads. It was so overwhelming that it got me thinking that possibly the generations' social skills had been slowed in developing because of the easy ways they can avoid actual human contact. We instead opt for quick blurbs online Which started with away messages with Instant Messaging led to texting and finally has progressed to tweets. If one so chooses they can communicate in real time without having human contact. This is why I believe that at least one of the iconic brands for adults 18-29 would be the iPod.
This generation feels the same way about information accessible on the internet that some people feel about the weather in the Midwest and that is if you don't like it wait 5 mins and it will change. Because the source of their information is constantly changing, they feel that thinking through and providing the most accurate and diplomatic information online is not necessary. They can provide information and if it proves wrong they can just as easily provide a retraction. For that reason I feel that blogging brands will be iconic. Most specifically I feel that blogspot with the backing of Google will remain one of the more identifiable/iconic brands.
Finally that leads to how information is brought to us and we can really trace this all back to some Standford students who started a small company called Google. This truly encompasses what is iconic of the 18-29 year old generation.
This is a difficult topic to talk about since most iconic figures and brands don't get that title until years after their time. When the Beatles first appeared did their fans truely feel that they were icons or did that title form over the decades that followed? Was Lincoln really considered an iconic figure during his time in office? I'm sure a lot of people would say "of course" but if you visit his presidental museum you can see that during the time he was under a lot of scrutiny for his policies from both sides of the war.
There's a recent trend in society and the news to be the first to report big events, to be the first person "in the know". People are crowning icons before they even have the chance to withstand the test of time. Add to that the fractured condition of media right now and you have icons for a plethera of different sports, hobbies, media, etc. etc. etc. To often now, trends get the position of icons but if they aren't remembered in 10 or 15 years and they didn't change anything are they icons? There were a lot of musicians, artists, TV stars, and politicians that seemed like a big deal at the same time the beatles were around. How many can you name? The ones that you can would be considered icons.
Since this question will be answered in the future and only the time will let us know what Brands will become iconic for the current young adults, I will base my answer in the industry that I know the most, but at the same time I really believe that these brands have the biggest potential to become iconic, in the first place I will said GOOGLE with only 12 years of life the brand is used for the 90% of Internet users and still growing, in 2005 It became the 38th brand in the world (Interbrand), but in 2009 ranking is the 7th brand in the world just behind Coke, IBM, Microsoft, GE, Nokia and McDonalds. The company is growing very fast and exploring new business besides searching and ads. My second brand will be FACEBOOK that with only 6 years in the market has been able to reach over 350 million active users 50% of them log on any given day, and average user has 130 friends on the site and spends more than 55 minutes per day on it, with all this stats I am positive that both brands will become icnonic if they are not yet.
Who needs icons when we have a rotating cast of the Jersey Shore or The Bachelor?? =)
The rise of reality television over the course of our teens and twenty's is just one example of the ADD culture that millenials have grown up in. I would completely agree with Chris that the ipod/iphone would be one of the defining brands of our generation. (especially those a bit younger than us since the majority of us are on the early edge of the millenial generation) The constant sharing of information has led to a culture of "the next best thing" (who remembers the first few winners of American idol - besides Kelly Clarkson...!) and does not really lend itself to true icons. Looking at that list, I would agree with Brian that Bono is probably the most qualified as an icon. Lady Gaga, in my opinion, would only be categorized as an icon representative of individulism.
I remember that Time Magazine that came out and declared that our generation is our own brand. I do agree but I don't think that lends itself to a culture or a time period that creates icons although I guess time will tell. If I had to add someone to the list, I'd add Obama.
When I think of "icon," the first words that come to mind are "classic" and "timeless" (possibly a result of too many Chanel advertisements viewed over the years). Using this as a basis (though the concepts of "mini-icons" or more fleeting cultural-based icons are intriguing), I'd have to agree with Chris that the iPod - or, more broadly, Apple - will end up being an iconic brand. While something negative may happen to Apple down the road, I think the iPod and the reinvention of the Mac have been so integral to our generation as a whole that the brand will be an icon.
Google is an interesting one, and maybe an indication that the iconic brands for this generation will be more tech-based than in the past. (P.S., Chris, one of the founders went to Maryland undergrad...just saying :)
As Jack said, Lincoln was not "iconic" back in his day, so it will be interesting to see what happens with the Obama brand. I think, though, that with his camp's innovative use of the internet for fundraising and grassroots movements, that this part of the Obama brand will become iconic...even if his presidency is not.
One more to just throw out there is Target. While it was not founded during this generation, the big expansion and huge gain in popularity was a more recent occurrence. Maybe it's just because I shop there ALL the time, but to me, Target has definite iconic brand potential!
First, I agree that we will have to take the wait and see approach with this generation's iconic brands. Many years will have to pass before the ripple effects of today's celebrities, politicians, etc will be completely felt. Who knew how much Michael Jackson meant to the generation until he was gone? Like so many celebrities, he had faded into the haze wild rumors and salicious gossip. Yet looking back, we can see how he influenced a generation of artists.
Second, because we have so often been told to be individuals, this generation looks to role models less. We are told be innovators, not imitators. We are segmented so much, down to the single person, that brands will have difficulty appealing to this generation as a mass market.
I agree Jack that we really can not classify someone as an icon until we've seen how successful they've been throughout their entire career. The only person I immediately identified as an icon was Madonna. She started off as a pop singer in the 80's and has constantly been reinventing herself over the past twenty years. Not only is she an incredible singer selling over 200 million albums worldwide, but she has starred in movies and written several children's books. Throughout this time she has never really been out of the public eye, with her various projects and controversies. Unlike some of our generation's other singers, like Britney Spears and Lindsey Lohan, who have peaked and fallen within a few years, Madonna has withstood the test of time and is a true cultural icon.
"Millennials." “The Trophy Generation.” It’s difficult to pinpoint an iconic brand for Generation Y because we have become our own icons. As Kate pointed out, Time Magazine named us Person of the Year. Kathryn highlighted urban dictionary, where “we define our world.” Michelle referenced Wikipedia, “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” Our mentality vastly differs from those of past generations. Armed with a sense of self-efficacy and self-definition, members of Generation Y define their ideals and values individualistically rather than as a collective whole. It is difficult to find a symbol that represents our “set of ideals and values” because we do not have a set of ideals—other than the ideal of self-importance. We clamor for attention; we are the generation of “me.” Think about it. If someone wants to contact me, they can call me, text me, bbm me, e-mail me, g-chat me, Facebook me, or Linked In me. We love it when people contact us. For what other reason would we give them a half a dozen venues through which they may do so? Also, you probably want to know how my winter vacation went. You must have missed my status updates during break. No worries. You can look on my Facebook page. There are some photo albums and some entertaining posts on my wall. They may even “pop-up” on your newsfeed. Just remember to “Like This” or comment when you see something about me that interests you. Still, there’s a more professional side of me I’d like to get across to everyone as well. I need to update my resume on Linked In so potential contacts can read about me.
We are the generation of me, which is not necessarily a negative. Mes are doers. They have confidence in themselves and their ideas. They believe that they can accomplish and some have/will eventually achieve something that renders them worthy of iconic status. Still, considering this “generation me” perspective, I think that what may be the iconic brand of our generation is, in fact, the social network. The collective set of venues through which we become our beloved “mes”
As I was reading the previous posts and perusing the slide show one thing really came to mind, my father. Currently my father owns and runs a family business that has three locations across the country. He just turned 56 years old and five years ago the idea of him having his own personal computer would have been more preposterous than Notre Dame winning the National Championship next year. Yet five years later my father has a laptop, knows how to use it (kind of,) and has even entered into the world of text messaging. This transformation proved to me that even those who absolutely abhor cutting edge technology, will eventually buy in to be part of this new global network.
As others have mentioned, the rapid changes in technology are not limited to the newest electronic devices but rather change the way we live and interact with one another. I do believe that to some extent branding and even marketing directly reflect culture and the current views of our societies. In this regard, iconic brands are affected as well, and as speed and efficiency become more and more important I believe iconic brands will rise and fall more rapidly as well.
I agree with the stance that time is a prerequisite for identifying a phenomenon as "iconic." I feel that the time requirement is especially relevant when considering millenial icons where everyone is already "unique" and "special" and where individuals are constantly trying to one up each other. Given this constant shift in what is truly "iconic" to millenials(Jersey Shore, Michael Jackson, Anthropologie, in addition to anything that may or may not have achieved icon status in the millenial mind), only time can allow us to see what truly resonates.
At the same time, I feel compelled to consider perspectives and experiences that greatly different from the mind of the typical millenial. Do 26-year-olds in underdeveloped countries see Michael Jackson as a global icon? Do especially precocious teenagers value Lady Gaga's "individuality?"
Thus my assessment is this...We, the millenials, by our very nature, are striving, often inadvertently, to become "icons" more and more each day.
This is a very interesting topic. From my observation, the Gen Y people hope they can been treated as special and important. So they really want to have their own personalities and want to be different from others. So we can expect the brands expressing uniqueness and individuality will become their icons, like Iphone, Itouch, Ipod..... The word "I" can really make them feel special.
They also really rely on tech and www to live their lives. They are surrounded by Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and google, and are holding Iphones and macbooks. So any high tech stuff which can make their lives more colorful and more fun will be iconic.
They also care about social issues, like enviromental issues and social responsibility. So
"Green" can be iconic to them.
I think that there can be generation-specific iconic brands, and many of those mentioned by my classmates that help define information technology will certain be associated with our generation for years to come. But, I do think that the strongest iconic brands are able to transcend multiple generations, continuously reinventing themselves to remain relevant to the current culture. Along with Coke, I would say Nike is another iconic brand and one that really took off with our generation. I don’t recall owning another brand of tennis shoes from about the third to twelfth grade. But, Nike is so much more than shoes and has been able to integrate its products into other iconic brands of our generation, such as through its Apple ipod partnership. Nike has also helped define many of the iconic athletes of our generation – Jordan, Tiger, the Williams’ sisters, Lance.
Speaking of Tiger, how many think of the animal or the golfer first?
Building off of Brian's comment on Bono, I also think Bono is an ironic choice, but still relevant. He was an icon in the 80s for his band's music. If you are 29 years old or younger, you can barely remember (if at all) how big this band actually was in the '80s. However, I do think the choice is relevant, since he has transformed himself into a credible celebrity humanitarian activist.
Building on this theme of transformation, I actually remember being referred to as the Nintendo Generation in the '80s. Now, Nintendo has reinvented itself as an interactive gaming juggernaut with the Wii that appeals oddly to every generation. For example, I could have never imagined playing Tecmo Bowl, Metroid, MT's Punch Out, or Double Dribble with my mom as a kid, but she soundly beat me in Wii Bowling over Christmas.
Perhaps many of the icons of Generation Y will be reinventions of past icons. Madonna laid the foundation, Lady Gaga seems to be the next generation. A few more examples would be: Lord of the Rings replacing Star Wars, Twilight replacing The Lost Boys, American Idol replacing Star Search, The Prius replacing the Metro, The Killers replacing New Order, Coachella replacing Lollapolooza, and Facebook replacing Myspace.
When I think of iconic brands now, brands that transcend through our generation, I think easily recognizable and rooted in pop culture. The thought of trend comes to mind as well. Or a way to express yourself that conforms with the rest of society.
Sara, you brought up Jersey Shore and Bachelor which I found funny. I have definitely been a bachelor follower for some time. But I really didnt jump on the Jersey Shore bandwagon til a few weeks ago. Truth be told, after watching the show once I really had no interest in seeing it again but I had to know what all the hype was around this ridiculous show. But it is shows like this that get so many people talking, tweeting, facebooking, and blogging about them which then cause people who normally wouldnt watch to go watch and be part of hype. Now I am not sure if either show at this point are iconic. Although I would agree that Bachelor would could be considered so since it has been around for some time. I do agree with the previous comments that time will tell if things become iconic. But I do think social media will certainly speed up the process of determining what is iconic.
I agree with several other posters in my belief that iconic brands in the traditional sense have gone the way of the dodo, simply because of the fractured nature of consumer experiences in the new millenium.
Just as we'll never see another Michael Jackson or Rolling Stones, and just as we'll never see NBC or the other broadcast networks have the kind of ratings dominance they once had, the era of mass popular appeal has come to an end as digital technologies have allowed people to form their own communities around their own interests and establish their own dominant brands within their different social circles. Choice and technology have forever altered the consumer landscape to the point that mass marketing is a recipe for disaster with almost every brand. Segmentation is now the dominant marketing practice, and all forms of popular culture are forced to reckon with this new fragmented consumer base.
All very good points. As technology is truly moving at the speed of light and Millennials continue to demand instant connections to the world, perhaps the definition of an “icon” as we know it will become obsolete. For, in this fickle society, iconic figures will come and go so rapidly as more and more people have instant access to both positive and negative word of mouth through social media. Look at Tiger Woods. According to Kathryn’s definition, “--"the person or the thing widely regarded as the most compelling symbol of a set of ideas or values that a society deems important.” Prior to this scandal, wouldn’t Tiger have met the definition of an icon? He embodied ideals such as determination, hard work, family values, achievement and charisma. And after his scandalous text messages were posted online for the world to see and speculation flooded the web, he is disgraced. He has lost almost all of his endorsements (excluding Nike, I believe) and has ruined his upstanding image and marriage. Therefore, I wonder if it’s possible in this day and age for an icon to be sustainable? Not to say that every iconic figure will have skeletons in their closets, but if there is any dirty laundry, rest assured that it will inevitably come out. Moreover, will the attention span of Millennials even focus enough attention on someone to allow them to reach iconic status over time? Or will new and interesting personalities explode on the scene, and just as quickly, disappear? When considering today’s culture, would marketers even want their brands to achieve iconic status?
This question is pretty tough, because for a brand to be "iconic" it needs to be established for a long time. Adults that are 18-29 have seen how quickly something can fade in and out of popularity, but something that endures is truly rare. Some brands that have the potential for this generation:
Apple - Yeah I know, this one was a softball. Apple is definitely a new company now and with the advent of mp3 players and itunes has completely reinvented itself. As long as it can stay on the cutting edge of technology, it has a chance to be iconic to this age group (I would argue that it is already iconic to an older age group).
Red Bull / Rockstar / Other awful tasting energy drinks - Okay I am a little biased on this one, but here is another opportunity to create an iconic brand. Red Bull did not make a huge appearance into mainstream culture until the 18-29 age group was an ideal target market. Because of this, they have a product that currently associates with this generation.
First and foremost, I'd have to agree with Sarah that Obama has to be what I would call an 'instant icon' for our generation. Up to the time of the election, our generation has been known for being less than productive, and thus associated with the negative economic aspects of recent years...and so when Obama came on the scene as an 'agent of change' (I believe that's what he ran on), it stuck to our generation as an instant icon. Hopefully if things turn out okay with Obama's years in office, hopefully we can be known as the generation that restored our nation to greatness and prosperity.
But Obama aside, how about other icons of our childhood...like Zack Morris? I think our generation will also be known for characters like him. I can remember learning a lot about what it was to be a creative high school student from episodes of Saved by the Bell.
Iconic brands are things of the past. No, really. It takes a lot of time for anything to become iconic - we don't see airports named after living presidents (do we?) and we won't see iconic brands until they've at least had a solid opportunity to die. The ones that don't - they'll be icons someday. GE is an icon not because it's a great company, but because it has weathered so many storms.
I agree with most of the rest of the class when they point out that our generation is inundated with new information that centers around ourselves. Just as we now, because of social networking, iphones, blogs, etc, need to be aware of how we act toward everyone in every situation, so does a brand. Would Tiger Woods have remained an icon if he had lived 50 years ago? I think he would - TMZ wasn't around back then.
Our generation makes everything transparent, and that transparency is undoubtedly the death blow to all brands that mess up and the lifeblood of those that do not.
Most of the technology related brands mentioned above may be hugely popular amongst 18-29 year olds, but most all of them are also popular beyond just this demographic. Hence, in my mind, these brands pass more as icons for the period in which they are popular rather than for a specific demographic. Youtube for example is a recent phenomenon. So is Gmail, the iphone, ebay, and the internet in general. But do these 'brands' represent 18-29 year olds any more than they do current 29-35 year olds? I think not! Moving away from technology, what about the Obama brand? While Obama won the election largely on the strength of 18-29 year olds, is his brand an icon for this demographic, or is it more an icon for the post-bush sentiment for something different?
I agree that very few traditional "brands" are likely to become icons for our generation. Developments and innovations that would have been considered game-breakers ten years ago are now viewed as incremental improvements that are easily copied. In a way, rapid technological advances have desensitized us. Traditional brands and products have extremely short life-cycles now Very few brands stay in the public’s consciousness long enough to turn a profit let alone turn into icons for a generation.
When I think about the icons of my childhood, I think about people and memorable events. I remember Michael Jackson doing the moonwalk while performing Billie Jean. I remember Michael Jordan taking off from the free-throw line. People, regardless of their attention span, will remember transcendent people and performances. No technological development can replicate the feeling of awe we feel when we witness a spectacular act, even if it’s in something as mundane as music or sports. This is why the icons for our generation will come from “people brands”. Let’s take a look at professional basketball for instance. The NBA has two transcendent stars in Kobe Bryant and Lebron James, both trying to one-up each other in the battle for the title of “best basketball player on the planet”. Twenty-five years from now, basketball fans in their 40s and 50’s will be telling their kids about the time Kobe put up 81 points in a game or the night Lebron scored 25 consecutive points in game 5 of the eastern conference finals.
The biggest part of an icon is that it has to transcend just the product, and companies simply don't control that. For that reason, I would agree that the idea of a generation-specific iconic brand is inconsistent with being an icon.
It's the difference between, say, Google and Intel. Google has more or less come to represent the combined benevolent power of the internet. It's almost impossible to not see their influence throughout the web, but it's almost always welcomed as an improvement. Intel has been a brand I have been a lot more exposed to it, but it lacks the same resonance with our generation that Google encompasses.
I'm late getting to this blog, but I do agree with the wait and see approach. One of my first thoughts before this year would have been Tiger Woods, but now I definitely do not think he will be known as clearly as an icon. To become an icon in my opinion, you have to stand the test of time, which will only be known in time. One event or mistake can define a person's career or life, so we have to wait and see who emerges in the end.
One reason why I think that it has become more challenging for brands to become icons in our time is that we are a very instant gratification generation. We know what we want, (which is usually the newest, best innovation) and we want it now, if not, yesterday. As a result, our attention span is also a lot shorter and we may not give brands the time and thought that they would have otherwise received generations ago.
Post a Comment