I just wondered, in the wonderland of Twitter, if there was something deep and meaningful to be said about so many of the 19 million people that watched the X-Factor final last weekend now buying the RATM track. I was puzzling over the schizophrenic relationship people have with the X-Factor brand that makes it, on the one hand, TV’s most compelling event and, on the other, the epitome of the machine against which we are born to rage. Is there a fracture in the joint between a TV show and a personal playlist? Are we so resentful, jealous, or tired of the commercial agenda of Simon Cowell? Followers, I asked, what’s happening here?
The answer from @hjonesy (that’s our Helen) was as profound as it was immediate: it’s a social experiment; something to try to see if it works. And I think she’s hit the nail on the head. This isn’t about music. This isn’t about the X-Factor, Simon Cowell, wee Joe, or some funny fellas in hoods. It’s about the most seismic shift in consumer behaviour that has happened for a generation, that has started in earnest in 2009.
If there is one thing that we are to remember 2009 for it must be the rise of social media and its ability to empower people, en mass and as individuals, as never before. For providing the opportunity for a single voice to express an opinion and for that opinion to join with others that are similar; growing, developing and coagulating as more and more join in, until their presence can no longer be ignored. Until their presence is so great that it becomes more significant than the subject that inspired the first voice to be raised. Until the desired and necessary change occurs.
Think Jan Moir. Think Trafigura. Even watch Gordon Brown on TED (no, do). In 2009 we have passed the tipping point at which the balance of power shifts from corporations and institutions (the brands) to the people. It marks the point at which brands have to start to think and operate differently. The point from which no organisation can ever be forgiven for putting itself first and for not taking its responsibilities to its audience, or the wider world, seriously.
Now, the RATM movement isn’t quite the real thing just yet. As Helen says, it’s an experiment rather than a genuine desire for a Christmas No.1 of one type versus another. It’s wrapped up with the irony that the real winner is Sony BMG who have both artists on their label – some will argue that the ‘enemy’ ends up winning after all. But that’s to miss the point. The enemy here isn’t Sony, or Cowell. It’s the old way of doing things. The past. And, in 2009, it’s been defeated.
I’m looking forward to 2010.
Good article Jim, but I’m not sure I completely agree with the balance of power argument.
At the heart of a good brand – and therefore the marketing that goes with it – is a central idea or point of view which people will either resonate with or not. If this idea is not grounded in a truth which the business can deliver on, and then be delivered at every touch point, people will walk away. That’s always been the case, think Enron and to a lesser extent McDonalds (post Morgan Spurlock).
I suppose my point is, brands have always been in the power of the consumer, it’s just now happening on a more immediate and larger scale.
It’s our job to make sure the brands we deliver are dynamic ones with integrity at their heart, then join the conversations and engage people on their terms.
ps. I’ve always hated X Factor and loved RATM. Power to the people!
steve.owen@dave.biz
twitter.com/steowen
Pingback: Clegg's success? #davidcameronsfault - The red, yellow and blue blog - Blogs - Brand Republic