Consumerism leads to Obsolescence

Postmodernism is a variety of meanings and definitions and is used to refer to many aspects of
social life from musical forms and styles, literature and fine art to philosophy, history and especially
the mass media and consumer culture. Featherstone (1991) points out the term has been used to refer to
new developments in intellectual and cultural theory; the idea that the way we see life and our sense of
identity has changed in recent years. Consumer culture plays a vital role in society and may be defined
as a constant change in the taste of consumer behavior. The term “consumer culture” refers to cultures
in which mass consumption and production both fuel the economy and shape perceptions, values,
desires, and constructions of personal identity. Economic developments, demographic trends, and new
technologies profoundly influence the aim and scale of consumer culture.

Consumerism is the tendency to satisfy oneself and consume in ever increasing amounts,
therefore it is viewed as a way of life for an entire society according to one of the categories and
elements of post-modernity. To that end, planned obsolescence acts as the driving force for
consumerist behavior in durable goods, enabling frequent repurchasing and replacement of goods that
would otherwise have lasted for much longer. Removed from each individual’s purchasing decision
and viewed collectively, this endless consumption is argued to be unethical and unsustainable. Others
however, see it as a vital part in the machine we call the macro economy. What can be done with
planned obsolescence, or more concretely, should anything be done at all?

The practical implementation of planned obsolescence leads to ethical problems. Choosing to

use planned obsolescence involves engineers sabotaging their designs. Also, frequent product renewal
cycles encourage restriction of the full and unpredictable flow of innovation to an artificially consistent
trickle. It also requires the concerted effort of marketing to degrade the existing products on the
market, reducing consumer satisfaction as a means to spur the purchase of the newest available goods.
While in service of the firm’s profits and survival, the conduct of its employees to achieve this end is
certainly questionable.

When considering how ‘green’ one’s lifestyle is, many first think about their method of
transportation, their energy usage, and their recycling bin, but not of their consumption of durable
goods. With electronics being one of the product categories most affected by planned obsolescence,
the disposal of old, undesirable and (sometimes) dysfunctional electronics has caused a significant
impact on the environment. While an indirect effect of planned obsolescence, our indifferent attitude
towards regularly disposing unwanted goods certainly increases the environmental problem.

It is in these issues that anti-consumerism picks stands against planned obsolescence. The
damage it contributes to the environment is significant, and the obvious consumption it cultivates
among us is precisely that which anti-consumerism fights against. Movements like degrowth and its
proponent Serge Latouche argue that current consumption levels are already unsustainable, and that
modern economics’ focus on continued growth in the economy is deceptive. They instead suggest
downsizing our hungry consumption, aiming to move the focus and desires of society off of ever-
increasing ownership for the sake of the environment.

This contrarian and prosperous take on modern society’s consumption habits certainly ring
hollow to many. To abolish planned obsolescence is to slow down our economy. It isn’t hard to see
that limiting consumption would destroy the economy and create unemployment. Ironically, it was this
exact context where planned obsolescence was first formally devised by Bernard London as a solution
to the Great Depression in the 1930s.
But the concerns of anti-consumerists are not to be dismissed entirely. Sustainability is indeed
an issue. While public awareness and education paced consumption and its effect on the environment
is perhaps greater than it ever has been, recognition of the problem alone is not enough. As an example
of how mankind should stand regarding planned obsolescence, the Philips LED light bulb comes to our
aid.
Widely applied by firms as a means to secure frequent repeat consumption and to discourage
competition, planned obsolescence is too deep-rooted to remove. That said, to ignore and dismiss the
issue altogether is to turn a blind eye to the ethically questionable practices involved, as well as the
attrition of our environment. It should be the truly innovative products, demanded by informed and
concerned consumers, and delivered by responsible and forward-thinking producers, which light the
path to a sustainable future.

Bibliography:

Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer culture and postmodernism. London: Sage.

Sharon Beder, “Is planned obsolescence socially responsible?,” Engineers Australia, November 1998,
52.
Joseph Guiltinan, “Creative Destruction and Destructive Creations: Environmental Ethics and Planned
Obsolescence,” Journal of Business Ethics 89, (2009): 19-28
Joan Úbeda, The Light Bulb Conspiracy, directed by Cosima Dannoritzer (Barcelona: Media 3.14,
2010)