« Evaluating O'Connor's Evaluation | Main | 4th »

July 03, 2005

Have the Marketers Won?

Business Week has a fun article on corporate America's triumphant co-option of hipster culture.  A movement whose original uniform was peppered with "Corporate Rock Sucks" stickers now sends their bands on tours sponsored by malt liquor, grabs refreshments in tents sponsored by Levi, and has proved most successful at gathering a hard to reach demographic into the areas where advertisers can get them:

Marketers, like parents, might spend sleepless nights worrying about not understanding youth. But they miss the bigger story. Formerly hostile subcultures -- yesteryear's punks and hippies and snowboarders -- now welcome them. Whether they've noticed it or not, marketers have won. Like Brickman, the hipsters are all buying in.

True that.  And the blogs, which evinced the same anti-establishment ethos as they grew are following closely behind.  Kevin Drum once told me that he didn't buy the big talk about our independence and detachment from advertisers.  Corporate America always gets in sooner or later, the question is just what sort of influence it has.  And that's turned out to be right.  Hugh Hewitt publishes books under a major imprint, Glenn Reynolds writes for MSNBC, Markos does (did?) Democratic consulting, is a fellow at a think tank,  and is writing a book, Duncan works for Media Matters, scores of bloggers from the left and right regularly descend on the cable channels to talk about the blogs and/or the issues they're discussing, Matt Yglesias is a rising start journalist, I've been hired by the American Prospect, Newsweek has a "blogwatch", The National Journal has a "blogometer", ABC's The Note links to blogs, CNN has "Inside the Blogs", and on, and on.

Blogs, like extreme sports, hippies, and hipsters before them, gained their currency and following by attacking the inequities of the MSM, but have decided that maturity, in large part, comes from acceptance.  And blog readers, who grew attached to their scrappy favorites, are glad to see the writers they've followed finally finding recognition.  That's how it always is, the establishment is hated because it doesn't notice.  Once it does notice, it's benign, ready to be condemned or celebrated on a case-by-case, or story-by-story, basis. 

The establishment, of course, doesn't walk away unchanged either.  As it welcomes in writers and reporters weaned on online sensibilities, those ethos find a home in the newsroom or the editorial desk.  The channel opens, with representatives able to bridge the divide bringing a synthesis approach to their work on both sides.  Whether that changes one or all mediums in a good way, I don't know, but it's never a one-way street. 

So have the marketers won?  Yes, in the sense that it's brought its attackers into the fold.  But that's a fairly small definition of victory.  If bloggers, hipsters, punk rockers, or extreme sport jocks can open what they do up to a wider audience without radically changing how they do it, I have to judge that a victory for the upstarts, even while it's a win for those signing the checks.  These young movements have an action they want to propagate, the establishment, as it is, just wants to make money.  The two aren't mutually exclusive and so the tension isn't zero sum.  The marketers may win, but that doesn't mean we can't, too.

July 3, 2005 in Weblogs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83458742e69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Have the Marketers Won?:

» Monday, July 04, 2005 from The Neolibertarian Network Blog
Ezra Klein: [Read More]

Tracked on Jul 4, 2005 11:31:15 AM

Comments

Ha! I'll never give in. It helps if no one wants you.

Posted by: Amanda Marcotte | Jul 3, 2005 3:54:36 PM

I don't think it's a valid comparison, Ezra. An anti-corporate musician selling out is one thing. But a blogger who comments on air? A horse of a different color.

One of the things I like about the bloggers that I tend to read is that they are connected to the sources of information out there. If I wanted mere baseless bloviating, I could always turn on Faux News or any talk show. I prefer to get my information from people who have demonstrated an ability to get the facts and either report or comment on them in a coherent manner.

(Truth in advertising: I used to write an editorial column for the local fish-wrapper, and I have a book, two book chapters, a couple of short stories, and a few articles to my credit on top of 200-odd editorial columns. But none of those things--except the editorials--were about politics per se. So I don't think that qualifies as "selling out.")

Posted by: Michael | Jul 3, 2005 4:01:52 PM

as they say in the movies, you used to be about the independence, Ezra.

It helps if no one wants you
been there, done that, still there, doing that

Posted by: almostinfamous | Jul 3, 2005 4:33:41 PM

What really matters is the degree of co-option - on both sides.

When the screams ('you are torturing us') from the advertisers causes a blogger to soften their view, change their position without apparent cause, or mouth the corporate party line, then the sellout is complete and the offender-blogger should be marked as spoiled goods.

The corporate sponsor or advertiser is rarely a sellout in these interactions, except to the degree that their image is bent by association. When the wingnuts organize their boycotts (like the attempt on Kraft Foods over their support of the Chicago Gay Games), they often quietly win - beneath the radar (or gaydar). Kraft and Microsoft are two that have withstood this attack from the right over their 'values', but far more companies have folded on running ads on 'gay-themed' TV shows - even high-rated ones.

When the content is not honestly determined by the producer, but by the advertiser, then the result is even worse than if no cross-contact had ever occured.

Far too often the corporate side gets its way in these transactions. So BEWARE!

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jul 3, 2005 5:11:34 PM

One of the things I like about the bloggers that I tend to read is that they are connected to the sources of information out there.

Well, yes and no, Michael.
One of the original alternative news sources, Matt Drudge, actually broke stories. However, most of the blogs simply parrot one another and add partisan comment. It's not bad, but it certainly is not "connected to the sources".

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 3, 2005 5:27:57 PM

Kraft and Microsoft are two that have withstood this attack from the right over their 'values', but far more companies have folded on running ads on 'gay-themed' TV shows - even high-rated ones.

Let's not forget, Jim, that it works both ways as evidenced just this week when GLADD and other would be social dictators shut down "Meet The Neighbors"...a telvision show that showed great commercial promise.

So how was that any different?

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 3, 2005 5:32:09 PM

Sorry, Zimmie, but the screaming queen in the fedora is only connected to his overactive imagination. I'd sooner take medical advice from Tom Cruise than believe a word of what Drudge says. The same for anyone (such as yourself) who gets his "news" from Fox.

Posted by: Michael | Jul 3, 2005 6:02:16 PM

So how was that any different?

Not much different, except for the spirit of the various shows.

Extreme Case: support for totalitarian governments (like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia), versus support for liberal democratic ones (UK, Netherlands).

All of the above are governments, but some are truly more reflective of traditional US values than others: tolerance, melting-pot inclusiveness, equal justice under the law, separation of church and state, etc.

A dollar of support from Kraft or Microsoft is probably more reflective of the values above than a dollar of support from Walmart or Domino's Pizza.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jul 3, 2005 6:04:19 PM

The same for anyone (such as yourself) who gets his "news" from Fox.

Mikey's stereotypes are holding him back and coloring his judgement. Perhaps he could show us all where I stated that (feel free to take your time searching the archives of this or any other venue, Mikey).
And just to add insult to injury, let's be clear. Matt Drudge scooped every other newssource, including the MSM on the Clinton lies and the existence of the blue dress.
Perhaps it's just the hate of others that clouds Mike's judgement...who knows? The sad fact is, he is simply wrong on both counts. Do facts count?

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 3, 2005 8:19:14 PM

Not much different, except for the spirit of the various shows.
You are correct, Sir. There really isn't much difference except for which side you cheerleader for. It is exactly the same until you allow your bias to color the facts and declare your side "good" and the other side "bad".

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 3, 2005 8:23:37 PM

If you're worried about being co-opted, or worried about everyone watching you never being approached for co-opting, do your blogging under a stupid nickname that nobody even knows how to pronounce.

You'll get no phone calls from meddlesome TV producers. I guarantee it.

Posted by: Kagro X | Jul 3, 2005 9:40:27 PM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I love when Ezra writes about "hipsters."

Zzzzzzzzzz.

Posted by: ethan | Jul 3, 2005 11:02:57 PM

Thomas Frank wrote a book about this, focusing on the Sixties, _The Conquest of Cool_. Turns out the Dodge Revolution predates the Youth Rebellion.

Posted by: gmoke | Jul 4, 2005 12:13:10 AM

Good point Kay-Gro or Cag-ro X. I post under my own name and I do it for a reason, but now that the Head of the County Democratic Party mentioned that he read my website I am kind of taken aback. My freedom to shout "Buck Fush" hasn't been compromised exactly, but then again I am not currently looking for a promotion. I choose my passwords from Celtic Mythology, perhaps I would be better off if I had always been posting as Manawydon.

As to the bigger picture I don't know that the marketers have "won". Certainly they have coopted a certain amount of the blogsophere, particulary the Center to Right portion (I don't see a lot of guys breaking down Steve Gilliard's door, or Digby's, or Quiddity's). But in the end you only sell out if you sell out. Take Hersh, Cockburn, Krugman and Fisk. I don't agree with everything each of them says, but I don't know that anyone would argue that the marketers "won" because these guys were taking a nice check home.

As long as people don't take Ari's advice to "watch what you say" it shouldn't be an issue. (I am reminded of a coarser era when politicians were advised that it was okay to take their liqour, and their hookers, as long as you were willing to say "screw that" when the vote came). Friends don't let friends get co-opted,

Posted by: Bruce Webb | Jul 4, 2005 8:11:59 AM

My blog is strictly add-free. I may only have a dozen or so readers, but at least my little corner of the Internet isn't trying to sell them anything (except maybe a few ideas about literacy, libraries and the importance of the written word).

Posted by: Keith | Jul 4, 2005 9:35:04 AM

OT:
New book brought to you by your friends at the nation of ISLAM. Certainly, every feminist should have a copy of this.


"HOW TO TELL IF YOUR MAN IS GAY OR BISEXUAL"


Shahrazad says, "Men living on the DOWN-LOW are Spreading HIV to their wives and girlfriends At alarming rates, threatening the Health and survival of every female On the planet - especially WOMEN OF COLOR!"

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 4, 2005 11:17:44 AM

One of the original alternative news sources, Matt Drudge, actually broke stories.

Name two stories that Matt Drudge "broke." Reporting on what a news paper will put on its front page 8 hours from now does not count.

Where do people get the idea that Drudge is a "news source"? He provides links to amusing stories he finds on the web... like fark, but without comments.

And Zimmy, the best blogs are invariably the ones where the author does have a personal connection to what he's writing about.

Posted by: Constantine | Jul 4, 2005 12:51:56 PM

Business Week has a fun article on corporate America's triumphant co-option of hipster culture

When a movement hits this stage, we don't call it "co-opted," we call it "over" or "passé." Trends burn themselves out. Hipster culture is no different than "alternative" or "hippy" in that sense.

Posted by: Constantine | Jul 4, 2005 1:01:53 PM

Constantine,

http://vikingphoenix.com/news/stn/1997/pirn9785.htm

Of course, in addition to these fine examples, he broke the BIG story of the existence of the Blue dress in the Clinton scandals.

The truth is, Drudge does break stories and is edging into MSM. He gets tens of thousands of hit daily. Sorry if you don't like him, but that doesn't change the facts.

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 4, 2005 1:15:01 PM

Drudge does break stories and is edging into MSM.

Cripes. Did you teleport here from 1998? I actually was unaware of the Drudge connection in the Larry Lawrence case in 1997, though I remember the story itself. That link you go to also claims that Ron Brown was murdered. Ah, for the halcyon days of nutty anti-cllinton conspiracy theorists.

For years, Drudge's only claim to fame has been that he reported on the shouting match in the newsweek offices between Isikoff and his editor (which is why I said "name two stories"). And that was it. The "tens of thousands of readers" of Drudge read him for the same reason they read fark, metafilter, or memepool-- because he links to amusing stories. Wonkette "breaks" more stories on a regular basis than Drudge. Seriously, you're repeating long-past claims about Drudge that, anyone who reads him regularly, knows aren't true.

The blue dress, IIRC, was mentioned by CBS briefly, then discounted, then raised back to life.

Posted by: Constantine | Jul 4, 2005 1:47:57 PM

>yesteryear's punks and hippies and snowboarders -- now welcome them.
Uh, no.

It's just marketers' latest tact: Marketing is the Borg; resistance is futile.

Posted by: bartkid | Jul 4, 2005 2:23:42 PM

>yesteryear's punks and hippies and snowboarders -- now welcome them.
Uh, no.

It's just marketers' latest tact: Marketing is the Borg; resistance is futile.

Posted by: bartkid | Jul 4, 2005 2:25:21 PM

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢托盘
木托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
杭州托盘
成都托盘
武汉托盘
长沙托盘
合肥托盘
苏州托盘
无锡托盘
昆山托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
南京钢制托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘

托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
木托盘
塑料托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘


托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

Posted by: peter.w | Sep 17, 2007 3:33:12 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.