3 ms·
> How else should we see it? I see it as it is; a constantly morphing organism, made up of thousands of people with conflicting interests and ideas, trying but
by aes256 14y ago
> How else should we see it?
I see it as it is; a constantly morphing organism, made up of thousands of people with conflicting interests and ideas, trying but often failing to present a cohesive image of itself to the public.
- CamperBob2 14y agoWhat, in your opinion, is the whole point behind a brand name? We see arguments similar to yours when the subject of the Sony rootkit fiasco comes up. "It's not Sony's fault, it was just a rogue actor in a subsidiary." Um, no. The CD says "Sony" on it. That means it's Sony's fault. They spend a lot of money on branding and advertising to make sure that no one ever forgets that. So let's not forget it.
- aes256 14y agoI don't really buy into brand names, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask. The way I see it, companies seek to use brands to exploit irrational consumer behavior, to increase their revenue beyond the level that would prevail in the absence of brands. Yours appears to be the equal and opposite reaction to this; attacking brands and urging boycotts so as to decrease their revenue below this ordinary level. I am advocating the middle way. Don't pay over the odds for a brand name, but equally don't boycott products or services just because you don't like the brand.