It's the end of the world as we know it.
One of the unexpected benefits of being a youth of the Internet Age is the ability to look at how time and again the corporate suits seem to think that the Internet is something which can be co-opted, controlled, coralled, and otherwise bent to suit their whims. The popular media seems to be replete with examples of how there's this apparent perception that all a company needs to do is to sprout a website with pastel colours and fancy designs to be "cool", or failing that, some cryptic ad campaign with a URL composed of nothing but oddly oblique symbols or sentences or phrases which may or may not have anything to do with the product or service that they're selling. We're jaded to things like that now. We lived through the hype and promise of the Dot-Com Bubble, and we're living right now in the hype and promise of "Web 2.0".
But of course once in a while a company throws us jaded netizens a curveball by doing that is so completely and ludicrously over the top that it's simply hard to believe it's true.
Right now, that company is Wal-Mart.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
Wal-Mart just recently launched a new website known as The HUB, and ostensibly, it's a "social networking" site (which is incidentally light on the "social" and completely non-existant on the "networking"). It's supposed to ape MySpace, apparently.
Take a look at one such user's account and then gauge the reaction by one young girl who was polled about this: "Some of the kids looked like they were trying to be supercool, but they weren't at all, and they were just being kind of weird," she said. "Are these real kids?"
And check out the video of the perky Asian "tween" linked on the front page:
Shopping will be my number ONE hobby this fall. I am going to be the most fashionable teen at school! I'll be on the lookout for the latest fashions. From leggings to layers, to boots and flats, big belts, and headbands! I'll be looking for it all! Layering is SO IN right now. Hobo bags are also in style. OH! And big sunglasses! WHOO!! I don't know where to stop! With all of the new clothes I'll be getting, the kids at school will be begging me for fashion tips!
And I feel fine
At the same time I can't help but wonder if today's marketing wizards and boardroom executives just haven't learned the number one rule of marketing: understand your target market. Understanding your target market isn't about setting up some false veneer of a social blogging website with a me-too façade. It means actually getting involved with them and understanding why they make the choices they make. And all of the hip and trendy websites with blog posts of questionable veracity and obviously scripted "reality videos" isn't going to change that.
But at the same time, I think about what I see in today's youth when I'm out there, and I can't help but wonder if in fact that's what they've done. Are today's kids really that shallow and materialistic? I've seen middle schoolers toting around iPods, PSPs and cell phones. Parents are now buying these kids thousand-dollar laptops for school when I'm sure it should be plain as day that an old fashioned notebook and pencil would do. For every youth I've seen who chooses to fight the establishment there seem to be a veritable legion of them who flee to the comfort of the things they buy. And yet, there they are. And I suspect, there are more of them than there were when I was their age. I can find some comfort in that, that despite all of the noise there are people out there who get the message. I think that as long as at least someone out there recognizes the monumental shame at the heart of marketing campaigns like Wal-Mart's, there is still something left for me to believe in amongst our youth.
posted by Ctenuchid @ 9:31 a.m.
2 comments
2 Comments:
That "blog" burned my eyes. Thankfully, the rest of the site required Flash 8, which isn't available for Linux yet. Saved me tons of pain, aye.
"Everyone tries to be different, but they're all different in the same way." Hence: half-destroyed jeans and cut-up T-shirts, sold at premiums. They were supposed to be "different," "independent." But you take a pioneering philosophy, and you expose the hungry masses to it. What happens? "Hey, that's cool. I want to be different, too." Adopters increase. Popularity booms. Result: the original idea is now buried underneath a massive pile of imitations, tainted by the sloppy machinations of its incompetent bandwagon jumpers. Anything, no matter how good, will be corrupted by the withering touch of the masses. They are not equipped to practice it to its core. But they want to be part of it, so they put on a pantomime of what it looks like from the outside.
See: people who recite the words, "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done." Do they know what they're saying? Do they realise what they are pledging themselves to? Or are they just mouthing the words because that's what they saw others doing, and they don't understand what is asked of their hearts and minds?
See: people who get Linux and bash Microsoft, because it's the cool thing to do and everyone's doing it. Do they even understand why Microsoft deserves criticism? Do they even know the full power of Linux? Or are they just trying to look like "l33t haxorz" and impress others, when the truth is they'd probably be better off using Windows?
My theory is this: there are the Listeners, and there are the Speakers. The Listeners are as sheep: they follow. We shouldn't dislike or bash them; the instinct to follow has its evolutionary reasons. Then there are the Speakers, who create their own paths. They are ultimately responsible for guiding the Listeners safely through the world. The gift of the Speaker is inspiration. The gift of the Listener is obedience.
So what is the problem? You cannot ask that a Listener become a Speaker. That is the mistake of the Speakers who advocate nonconformity: they expect Listeners to be like themselves. This is wrong. A Speaker may have no qualms about being different, but that is his special trait. A Listener's calling in life is to follow, in an orderly manner.
This is what happens when a Speaker makes the above mistake: he preaches that everyone be different, that everyone think for themselves. Easy task for him - but not for the Listener, who is only equipped to follow instructions. So the Listener follows to the best of his/her ability, which means s/he imitates what s/he sees. When the Speaker told people to be different, he expected them to do what he does: come up with new ideas on their own. But that's not possible for them. So he becomes frustrated when he sees his own idea "butchered" by those people. Worse yet, people - both Speakers and Listeners - attribute the "butchered" practice to him, when it was not his intention!
So the lesson there, I suppose, is this: we should still have faith in people, but let's be more realistic. Have faith in them that they are well-intentioned and capable of doing what they do best. But it is erroneous to expect them to be exactly as we are. It is not elitist to mistakenly think they are; it is elitist to think they should be.
J'ai fini.
First, I completely agree with Fyda, who is far more articulate than I could ever be on this subject.
I just want to add, words like "shallow" and "materialistic" are best used with a bit more caution. These words don't simply denote a propensity to buy stuff that one doesn't need. They are better used to describe people whose very standards of approval are based upon the ownership of material goods and wealth. It's quite a damning judgement.
Yes, these people do exist, to varying degrees, and for various reasons. However, they are not the only people who like shopping, or fashion, or gadgets. Case in point: me. I like shopping. I like pretty gewgaws, shiny gadgets, and when I find clothes that I love that work on me, I admit to being thrilled beyond the point for which such an occasion calls. But I consider myself neither a materialistic person, nor a shallow one, because I care more about people than things. My point? Making assumptions based on what people buy doesn't work.
Also, I don't think kids today are at heart any different from the kids of any other generation. They just have different opportunities (and disadvantages) than the ones we had. But I suppose that's debatable.
Post a Comment
<< Home