by DK Badenhorst (@BrandCultureSA) Branding, to the degree that we exercise it, is very human. What brands are, what they have been and what they are becoming is a vast territory that many researchers explore. Brands can also play an important role in shifting culture, but we have to be sober about what the strengths and limitations of branding really are.
I recently read an interesting statement: if you’re about to pen the line “what is unique to human beings is…”, you should stop right there; you’re on your way to making a mistake.
The context is pet ownership. Koko the gorilla famously kept a cat (and cried deeply when the cat passed away). Then there’s the strange case of tarantulas keeping tiny frogs as pets. The relationship between a spider and a frog arguably falls beyond the scope of any real emotional connection, so whether it qualifies as pet ownership in the classic sense of the word is up for debate.
Traditional ‘exclusively human’ characteristics
But all the traditional ‘exclusively human’ characteristics that have been claimed over the decades have, however, been eroded as our knowledge of other species expanded.
- Aviary species have shown a significant propensity for temporary pair-bonding, as well as tool usage and an ability to remember faces (think about that before you shoo those ravens away).
- Elephants and dolphins have shown the ability to recognise themselves in mirrors, and orcas have (among many other things) figured out how to work as a team, how to use a form of language and have even been found to play with their food.
- When it comes to closer relatives, chimpanzees have been seen mimicking fishermen and the bonobo is known for throwing caution to the wind and being hopelessly in love and, according to some, sexually liberal. Writers have gone as far as to say that had we discovered the bonobo before we discovered chimpanzees, our take on ourselves might have been interestingly different.
It would, therefore, seem that it’s not a specific trait that makes us unique, but rather the degree to which we bring it to life. Yes, ravens can use tools, but to date there is no bird that has developed a power tool or built a transportation device. Yes, most mammals are social, but few animals show empathy and team work to the degree that humans do. The internet as a social tool should stand as a testament to our remarkable ability and desire to work together as well as our complex understanding of tools.
Branding is also very human
Yet why write this in a brand column? Branding, to the degree that we exercise it, is also very human. What brands are, what they have been and what they are becoming is a vast territory that many researchers explore. But, for the purpose of this column, I’d like to start with Daniel Chandler’s opening line of Semiotics For Beginners: “We seem as a species to be driven by a desire to make meanings: above all, we are surely Homo significans — meaning-makers.” While many animals leave their name or their scent on objects or places, humans seem to amplify the phenomenon by stepping out of instinct into something a bit more cognitive.
A particular smell may communicate a scent of a male or female dog and, without our intervention, dogs will carry on understanding smells (symbols) in the way that they do. The symbol is instinctively tied to the meaning.
Humans are definitely not the only animals with the ability to loosen the symbol from its meaning (Pavlov’s dog changed the meaning of a bell), but we do show a strange motivation to do so; we like to make one thing mean more. It’s only human intervention that can, eg, teach a dog to associate a bell with food. But this is still a far cry from what people do. To compare the human use of meaning and symbols to that of other mammals is once again like comparing the internet to the pebbles a crow uses to raise the level of the water in a tube.
Nike marking sneakers
Is it really, though? Is the difference that big? Is a dog marking a tree not just a simplified version of the Nike Corporation putting its swoosh on a pair of sneakers? Yes and no. Yes, in that it leverages a symbol. And, instead of saying ‘male dog marked this tree’, we say ‘Nike marked these shoes’. But this is where many animals stop. Humans take it further; not only do we have symbols with meaning; but we build them into bigger systems of meaning.
The three digits 300 refer to three hundred, the mathematical concept. But, in the right context, it could refer to 300km, 300mm or 300kg. And that may in turn mean 300km still to go, which, if seen in the context of a 3000km drive, becomes something else to, say, a 350km drive. And what if we refer to 300 soldiers?
In addition to that, it allows us to preserve this information and pass it along. The earlier reference to a chimpanzee which spotted and mimicked fishermen goes further, telling how he eventually found it easier to just loot their nets (much like we’ve figured out to simply loot the hives of bees).
Complex meaning systems
But this information will die with the specimen. The species has never developed complex meaning systems that would allow for any particular specimen to tap into — he couldn’t record the information, at least not to the point where other chimpanzees would see the symbols and pick up where he left it. If other chimpanzees didn’t see him, they’ll never know.
Much like math, language is one of the most taken-for-granted meaning systems out there. Carl Sagan held that the written word or the book was the greatest invention of all time, as it allowed anyone with a good-enough education to be transported into the mind of someone else — even hundreds of years into the past. Books are, indeed, only limited by the reader’s ability to access the same language system in which the book was written, much like a browser is limited only by its ability to read universal programming languages.
At this point, it feels as if we’re at a fork in the road. Should we advocate for a global language, turning us all into a sort of browser that can read any page, an agent that can simply understand and open any idea in a standarised form? What of culture? What about the many nuances that are captured in dialects, developed through local needs and to express emotions and desires crafted by the unique circumstances of a particular region, by a particular people, in a particular point in history?
Superbly powerful global brands
Global brands have become superbly powerful in this space. As local language has fused words and their meaning to express and evoke emotion among people who share culture, so brands isolate a group of people (big or small) and work hard to fuse just the right meaning with the brand in order to evoke just the right response. Language has its limitations, but brands leverage everything — literally everything that has an ability to carry meaning — and borrow from everything that has carried meaning before.
This Nike commercial highlights how a simple gesture, barely notable, carries a strong and powerful meaning, not only in American culture but also globally. What is curious is the variety of accents we see on something as simple as a tipping of the hat. You don’t need to use a word like “water” to explain accents; a simple tip of the hat does the same, and somehow the accent brings a little extra dimension.
The Nike commercial is a simple one. The message is straightforward, and showing respect is a global truth — all people understand respect. Whether you grant it or deny it is a different story but, in essence, we all value respect.
The Beats Electronics’ rugby commercial is interesting in that it leans heavily on something that is exceptionally local and divisive to gain widespread appeal and inclusivity. Very few things draw lines in the sand like sports do. Teams, sports, best players and sporting rituals are all things that bring out our most-tribal selves. And yet here a brand relies upon this very phenomenon to gain wider appeal.
The commercial is a powerful one, made all the more powerful through better sound. The success of the story lies in that it’s not about headphones or about New Zealand; it’s about roots and dedication that only happen to come to life in NZ. We like to belong; we all want to come from somewhere. We believe in dedication and we want to work hard for something great. These are the universal truths that the commercial taps into. It plugs into something that Richie McCaw did well, something the NZ rugby culture celebrates and something that everyone wishes they, too, could celebrate. Much like respect, this sense of belonging and rootedness is something everyone values, it’s a human truth. It you have it, you love it; if you lost, it you mourn it.
Symbolism and Beats Electronics
Symbolism is interesting. Language signifies purely by convention. The word man (m-a-n) looks and sounds nothing like an adult human male. But, by convention, it makes the reference. Indexical symbols, though, have some physical link — eg smoke being a symbol of fire. Brands, it may be argued, are a bit of both. By convention, Beats can own the pre-game space. But what does it offer; what is the RTB? Workout music, of course. It becomes a brand that is there for the months leading up to the game. Beats is there during the lonely workouts or tireless miles on the road. It’s the brand that celebrates where you’re from, and knows the roots of your success better than anyone else does.
When Nike paints its swoosh on a pair of shoes, it doesn’t mean to say ‘good quality’ (by this time, that goes without saying). It stands for its belief that we are designed to move; that greatness lies within everyone; and that you should cast doubt aside and just do it. It speaks to a heroic sense of innocence in all of us.
Similarly, when Kindle hashtags #haveKINDLEwillTRAVEL, it taps into an old sense of rebellious freedom (“have gun, will travel”) but brings together the curiosity and sense of exploration that are so important to many of us.
Hopes and dreams
There are things that society wants. Sometimes we should actively campaign against something to get them, whether it’s a stance against bigotry, racism, homophobia or violence. They need someone to stand on a soapbox and clearly articulate a message that communicates ‘to here and no further’. But, at the same time, people want to hope and dream. They want to believe together and they want to be able to simply and easily say, “I am this and I believe so and so.”
The return of the right is an alarming (and some would say inevitable) new trend. I recently bought an American product that explicitly stated “made in America, never shipped from China”. These are new incarnations of old lines in the sand. Donald Trump, amusing as he might seem, speaks a language of us vs them. His take on foreigners literally include a wall.
It’s difficult to talk ‘together’ in a world where the loudest, most-resonant cultural language is ‘separation’. But brands are armed with pretty big megaphones. They cannot, however, move culture or bring people together. But they can dig around and create pieces of communication that can fence off new ways of thinking. Brands can play an important role in shifting culture, but we have to be sober about what the strengths and limitations of branding really are. Brands can provide the communication, the thinking and the language, but — only if the offering is compelling enough — will people join the conversation and shift culture.
Purpose and meaning
Steve Jobs created a brand with purpose and meaning, but it took hordes of young people sleeping outside Apple stores, rubbing their phones in everyone’s faces and being generally obnoxious to finally shift tech culture from geeky to creative and aspirational.
DK Badenhorst (@BrandCultureSA) is lead strategist at Cape Town ad agency, FoxP2 wno brings cultural context and long-term trend insights to brand communication through cultural insight and semiotics. He contributes the monthly “Brand Culture” column, exploring the value and meaning interaction between brands and society, to MarkLives.com.
— MarkLives’ round-up of top ad and media industry news and opinion in your mailbox every Monday and Thursday. Sign up here!