About branding and self ethics

PhD. Oana BARBU Political Science, Philosophy and Communication Science Faculty West University, Timioara

Along with the arrival of postmodernism, the speech on ethics as a practical rationality customises itself. Of course, if we should talk about the postmodernist revolution in ethics its impossible to not notice the thicket in which we are putting ourselves along with the lack of referential delimitations. Because of these reasons, a postmodernist perspective on ethics was associated in most of the cases with the end of ethics or with the replacement of it with the supremacy of the aesthetics that has a lack of rules with an universal availability (the estethisized world, shape prevalence, the civilization of the image, the show society etc.). Gilles Lipovetsky1 suggests in this manner, along with this Postmodernity, that mankind has finally entered the post debt era, a post-deontic era, in which the individual saw itself free from the tyranny of must, from the oppressive normativity of the infernal debts of moral norms. Our era is described by an undeserved individualism which illegitimated the sacrifice itself. The individual manifests a fierce preference for a better life, fighting for an ethic of limited wellbeing, limited only by the value of tolerance, but even this is when it is associated with self glorifying individualism and without compunctions, can be expressed only as indifference2. This situation of a prevailing morality, minimal, is one that is completely new, Lipovesky pushing us to applaud, and be joyful about the freedom that it is offered to us. This paper will try to analyse the role played by the brand communication and the branding campaigns that started to interfere in the education of the masses on moral norms and social responsibility. The communicational world brings in a front light values, that are on the other hand always currently in ethics normativity: the respect for our own person and for the others around us, tolerance, serving the wellbeing of the public good, the ecological ethics, etc. Relevant for this involvement of philosophers used at a global level is the example of the deontological codes included in the
1 2

Gilles Lipovetsky (1996), Amurgul datoriei, ed. Babel, Bucureti. Zygmund Bauman (2001), Etica Postmodern, ed. Amarcord, Timioara. p. 7

recommendations of international ethics committees : the responsibility of the medium around us, that is imposed by various ecological movements is sustained by the start of eco projects at a organizational level, of more and more companies associating their selves with the institutional communication of a deontological vision for the Environmental Protection that the ecological movements impose is accompanied by the starting of eco projects at an organizational level, more and more companies associating to the institutional communication a deontological vision for environmental protection. Even more, the so-called moralising stream, based on social responsibility in the process of production and consumption, to which more and more companies adhere, is being felt again through the reappearance of eco products, of campaigns for healthy nourishment, of biological hygiene, of label messages that lead to recycling the packaging, of green tourism etc3. We will try to explain in our paper that today, along with the influence of the brand purchased products, we are witnessing the birth of a neo-individualism in which Man is both hedonic and organized, willing of having unlimited freedom, but fed up with early postmodern profusions. The beginning of the 21st century finds the contemporary man in a tidy mess, in which personal comfort and the ethics of self offers him a new meaning to responsibility for the others. Key words: branding, worry ethics, social responsibility, postmodernism, humanism

Postmodern ethics

Along with postmodernism, discourse on ethics as a practical rationality reinvents itself. The main reason for which we will stop over Zygmund Bauman and Gilles Lipovetskys researches that regard postmodern ethics is the consensus over making the contemporary world practical by leaning more and more toward everyday life, praxis and a post duty ethics. According to both theorists, as a following of the fact that the modern era reached the step of self criticism, often much too abstract in its approach, most of the paths followed by ethic theories saw themselves put in front of deadened ways. Postmodernity, through the deconstruction put in action, would open the possibility of a totally new understanding of the moral phenomenon.
3

Idem p. 245

Of course, when we talk about the postmodern revolution in ethics we cannot overlook the thicket in which we are putting ourselves along with the lack of referential delimitations. Because of this reasons, a postmodern perspective on ethics is associated much too often with the end of ethics or with its replacement with the supremacy of the aesthetics that has a lack of rules with universal availability. Gilles Lipovetsky4 suggests in this manner, that along with Postmodernity, mankind has finally entered the post-debt era, a post-deontological era, in which the individual saw itself free from the tyranny of must, from the oppressive normativity of the infernal debts of moral norms. Our era is described by an undissolved individualism which illegitimated the sacrifice of the self. The individual manifests a fierce preference for a better life, fighting for an ethics of wellbeing, limited only by the value of tolerance, but this when associated with the self glorifying individualism and without compunctions, can be expressed only as indifference5. This situation of a prevailing minimal morality is one that is completely new, Lipovesky suggesting us to applaud and be joyful about the freedom that it offers us. We would add here what Z. Bauman calls the innovation of the postmodern perspective on ethics that is, the fact that she doesnt argues the moral preoccupations of modernism, he rejects its typical approach on moral problems. We refer, for example, to the repeated proposals of some coercive norms as a response to the moral problems of our daily practices or at the unchanging need of theoretical consolidation and universalization of moral normativity. This way, far from being a critic of modernism, the postmodern perspective of Bauman targets against the trust of modern man in the possibility of an ethical non-bivalent, un-aporetic code and that which should benefit of practical applicability: What is postmodern is just the lack of trust in this possibility, postmodern not in chronological way [...] but in the way of suggesting (under the shape of a conclusion or a premonition) of the fact that long and sustained efforts of modernism where directed wrong, undertaken through mystification [] that modernism will show (if it didnt do it already) without the possibility of denial the impossibility, the futility of hope and the harmness of the papers. The simple
4 5

Gilles Lipovetsky (1996), Amurgul datoriei, ed. Babel, Bucureti. Zygmund Bauman (2001), Etica Postmodern, ed. Amarcord, Timioara. p. 7

ethic code universal and solid built will never be found; [] an unaporetic non-bivalent morality, a universal ethics and objectively built is a practical impossibility; it is maybe an oxymoron, a contradiction of terms6. Along with his book Le Crpuscule du devoir ( Amurgul datoriei ), Gilles Lipovetsky proposes the concept of a painless ethics of the new democratic times, an light ethics in which tolerance and consensus stand at the base of the moral of contemporary society. If modernity is associated with a rhetoric of debt, the present refuses all moral ideals. Even more, another important aspect is being put into discussion: modernism is seen as being responsible for the separation of morality from religion, by proclaiming and admitting a moral that admitted only the authority of ration. This way, like it can be seen at Kants, the efforts of a practical rationality were aimed into building moral norms on unanimous accepted bases through their quality of universal laws. The consequences of centring ethics on the idea of debt was the inevitably fall into mannerism because of the impossibility of conceiving systems that would rank different types of laws. But, this thing led to an idealising moral duty, very much like a religious duty: Making a laic ethics that would build social order, foreign ethics of any revealed religion, has actually reinserted the sacred dimension of this at last: ancient religious debts followed modern hyperbolic religion debts of you have the duty to...7. Following this perspective, modern democratic culture can be reduced to three aspects: technical domination projects of nature, the pleading for the suzerainty of the people and the primacy of duty. Bauman suggests that Lipovesky makes the same mistake as other postmodern theoreticians, the double error of representing the subject as an investigation resource, which has to be explained as being what is being explained. It must be understood adequately the way in which moral rule has detached from the tyranny of must in the space of modernity, to make the dimension of the moment of redeeming his self. It is a fact that an era of contra-moral redeemed against normativity as a reaction to their repression, or this libertine hedonism is a consequence of a sum of conditions that were wanted to be fulfilled?

6 7

Ibid p. 14 Lipovetsky (1996), op. cit. p. 34

In the search of an answer, Bauman delimits the characteristics of a postmodern moral consequence under the shape of some premises that we will interpret ourselves like they are: a) Firstly we assist at a fundamental bivalence of moral condition through the recognition of the human nature coexistence of the classical polarity good-bad. A non-bivalent morality is a existential impossibility8, that makes an ethic code to be coherent from a logical point of view and cannot include an certain bivalent essence of morality b) Even more than this, morality is in a natural way irrational, it doesnt result from the social arrangements or the rational judgements that proceeds, but it is seen by Bauman as being a natural reservoir of moral impulses, unpredictable and bivalent, only later standardized into ethical and juridical codes. But, the variety of ethical codes, located historical and/or culturally, stand proof that morality doesnt result from Law and it doesnt resume to it (even if it doesnt manifest a constant will of monopolisation), the boundary between them resuming to partial and local verbalisations...in deontology, we would add here. c) The above mentioned arguments have as result the presence of an ambiguity of moral consciousness and of practical rationality in general. Rightly, if morality is bivalent and irrational (proof standing the numerous value antinomies enunciated by Lipovetsky in the Le Crpuscule du devoir, appearing to moral ego as being ambiguous, even aporethical. Only few options are unambiguous good. Most of the moral options are being made between contradictory impulses. The most important one is, still, the fact that almost moral impulse, if it is acted fully on his basis, has moral consequences (the most characteristic, the impulse of taking care of the others, when it is put to the extreme, causes annihilation of the others freedom, domination and oppression9. Regarding the matter in we fall into an agreement that it is a utopia to consider that there are moral situations with lack of ambiguity, the moral individual will stand always in the presence of uncertainty, which will make the responsibilitys presence to always be one step ahead in what has been done and what can be done.
8 9

Zygmund Bauman, op. cit. p. 15 Ibid p.16

d) Maybe the most important conclusion that can be reached by the author is the fact that morality cannot be universalized. This doesnt mean that it involves a moral relativism, but especially an empowerment of the moral ego, the individual fully assuming his moral decisions. Bauman aims at this point his attention over the substitution of autonomous responsibility of the moral ego through ethical rules, imposed from outside10. But, ethical codes of modernism had as an effect the coercive standardisation of individuals and their lack of responsability, their role resuming to the convention of heteronomous law (in the virtue that the institution that administrates and through which it identifies was built). Putting into discussion that any instance (institution, like the author calls it) can be expressed as a juridical responsibility, but never a moral one, the social control of morality is a complex and delicate operation that stirs more bivalence than it succeeds in eliminating.11. e) In his own way, Bauman associates rationality with social control over moral ego. From here results are even more interesting fact about contemporary society, through which maybe we will manage to get closer to the meaning and understanding of our paper. On rational arguments, Bauman notes that morality is and must remain irrational, a moral of chose. f) Of course, in a universe dominated by pictures, the individual appears naked in front of social interactivity. From the above notes we could deduct a moral ontology of the postmodern ego through postulation (on one hand by Bauman and on the other by Lipovesky) of a openness to the Other that precedes the relation with him. It must be implied that moral response to be for The Other before having the possibility of being with The Other. is the first reality of ego, a starting point rather than a product of society.12Although it is associated with a crisis of uncertainty and excesses, the postmodern moral consciousness has in hand the responsible freedom that assists it. Along with disposal of meta-narrative modernism, we assist at the possibility of the appearance of an individual with his destiny towards communication, because its morality is a given by nature, the giving up, if it would take place, appears on the path that leads from moral ego, to social ego, from being for, to being just with13.

10 11 12 13

Ibid p. 17 ibidem Ibid p. 18 ibidem

To understand better the perspective that is opened by post moralist ethics, it is ought to pay more attention to Baumans theory according to which the postmodern perspective over moral phenomenon doesnt reveal moral relativity. Of course, postmodernism itself raises numerous of methodological problems, and regarding ethics there are a series of authors, that even Bauman recognizes, to have embraced the theory relativism faster. In this way, the author tries to overcome the problem fighting for a liberal morality in absence of an universal ethical code. From his perspective, we have got into a new state of consciousness: we know now what we didnt know then [] that a non-aporetic, non-ambivalent morality, a universal ethics and objectively funded one is a practical impossibility14. This doesnt mean that the fundamentals of ethics lost their genuineness, but they just have to be approached from another perspective. If modernity separated ethics from religion, postmodernism proposes a morality without an ethical code, a distinction between ethics and morality by creating a moral space beyond the social space in which individuals activate. We can understand the distinction between morality and ethics if we define moral relation as the relation me-others, in which the availability of the ego to sacrifice itself for the last one doesnt need any answers from the preset norms.

Specialization of ethics. New ethics

A post moralist society designates the age in which moral duty is sweetened and enfeebled, in which the idea of ego sacrifice lost identification. In which morality does not pretend to dedicate to a higher purpose than you, in which the subjective rights dominate imperative prescriptions, in which moral lessons are accompanied by advertising which excites the comfortable life, the holiday sun and the media entertainment. In a post duty society, the evil is transformed into a show and the ideal is too less praised. The values that we recognise are much more negative (dont do) than positive (you must ): beyond ethical revitalization, triumphs a painless moral, an ultimate state of individualistic culture relieved from now on, in its deep logic, by morality as well as by anti-morality15.
14 15

ibidem Gilles Lipovetsky (1996), op. cit. p. 59

Going on the path of moral without ethics, we could say that the first observation that brings us in front the theory of Gilles Lipovetsky, is the fierce interest for ethics in more and more domains, most of them being apparently only tangent the moral problematic: architecture, economy, mass-media etc. Even more interesting is the fact that we dont assist at an intrusion of ethics in this domains, but rather to a need of ethical reflections from inside. And so, the contemporary world does not stop to surprise us: in a world in which universalism (including the ethical one) was so strongly argued, we assist at a visible need of ethical reflection, along with an openness generalized by surprising the ethical implements in more and more domains. This position actually led to the appearance of deontology in specific domains and professions, and also to justifying new ethics, among which are: the ethics of the environment, biomedical sciences, ethics of mass-media, of business etc. But in a postmodern spirit, this new directions cannot be surprised in an assembles way, in an unification perspective; even more than this, rather than uniting them under the name of applied ethics, they can be treated as being chapters of a unitary discipline. On the other hand, these so called ethics cannot even be defined as disciplines in a real way, although it is revealed their tendencies of specialization or of institutionalization (to be seen in this way the making of evaluation committees of audio-visual, or the journalistic deontology). The end of the 20th century brings face to face with a wide process of building professional deontology, established by experts from particular domains, among which, even if they are still present, theorists, philosophers or cultural personalities dont have the main voice. The apparition of more and more activity domains like the immaterial labour prevalence (consultancy, services etc.) have led practical philosophies (such as ethics) to a higher specialization in which are discussed problems about moral implications that interfere in some very specialized activities. Often the offered response of this type of specializations cannot be a certain one; it is constructed progressively on deontological codes, through approximation and elimination of errors. Even more than this, investigating the aspects with ethic relevance requires a detailed knowladge of a certain domain (even we are to talk about the construction of a commercial campaign, directing a TV show, selecting the leading staff or institutional communication etc)

As a major consequence of higher specialization of these domains, we can signal the appearance of a specialized language, specific for that field, even if sometimes its effects can be baffling for communication and information rendering. We notice these mutations especially in the sphere of individual morality, where Man has passed from a language of moral duty, to the articulation of the self(passed around in the first and second phase of postmodernism, until de 80s) and further to a more private approach in which the accent falls on performative gestures of the own person16, the interest for our own individuality and individual comfort surpassing the universal law. The consequences of moral intrusion in the individual sphere unleashes constantly in a fragmented public sphere, in the professional sphere of individuals. A whole new stream, known as business ethics, puts the problem of a triple moral report at a social level: between employee and employer, between company and its public, between company and partner institutions. This kind of axiological transparency between public and private make us notice at the level of activity domains considerations about values marketing, brand communication and ethical identification in promotional campaigns. A greater accent is being put on the evaluation of the immaterial benefits of some products and services, on the success of ethical investment at the community level or in social responsibility campaigns (CSR). As a recent consequence of ethics specialisation, we must notice the appearance of new domains of activity, the one of experts in ethics, ethicians, the so called experts in consultancy on deontological problems. These characters are more and more present in enterprises in the search of maximising efficiency by harmonising staffs interests with businesss development strategies. Lipovetsky proposes the example of enterprises that edit intern publications, following through this the organisation of ethical reflections for enterprises personnel17. This way, even if the role of the philosopher preoccupied with ethics has a lack of meaning, failing to harmonize theory with daily practicality in the contemporary society, the interest for social and economic sciences for moral problems led to professional training of experts capable to form recommendations for ethical issues in business, underlining one more time the social function of practical philosophy expressed in applied ethics.

16 17

Ibid p. 86 Gilles Lipovetsky (1996), op. cit. pp. 274-275

We must not look with superficiality at this light ethic proposed by Lipovetsky or Bauman. Even if in the case of business ethic we are dealing with a moral of interest awareness aiming to streamline the action, the new ethics, born from the newly created contexts, doesnt abbot from the universal topics of practical philosophy regarding the condition of man in the world, his relationships with others or self-comparing. Along with the wide process of this ethical decision democracy, we can recognise the advantages of deontology. Because moral duty appears powerless when new situations appear that end in value antinomy (the mechanism through which new duties are created, not being clear), the specialization of ethics led to the call of making a difference between good and bad regarding the jurisdiction of experts in certain domains (doctors, sociologists, philosophers, journalists etc.) A big question mark is raised right from the interior of the problem: as long as the settlement of what is right and wrong, of good and bad regards from now on, in a certain quantity, the professionals of ethics18, what are the chances that the sources of moral decision to be understood by each and every individual? By what means and until when the interference of an expert in ethics extends at the level of private life? According to Lipovetsky, the ascension of the professionalization and expertise in moral problems, through which a new division of work appeared, and even ethics entered the path of institutionalization, of bureaucracy, of functional specialization19, can be interpreted as an effect of the wide process of rationalization of western modernity. On one hand, from science to ethics it can be noticed the intention of rationalizing purposes and moral action, that led gradually to a ethics seen as a tool, and on the other hand, if we look through the angle of implication of ethics in the variety of new activity domains, we notice an increased necessity of scientific research value control and the valence of new technologies. This way it becomes easier to understand the openness of more and more domains towards the applicability of ethical reflection. The transformation of the ethical speech into a one that is strongly specialized and deontological, comes in anticipation of the post-moralist ethics adjustment to social pragmatics. It is not only the pressure of a postmodern confusion in the favour of a bigger pragmatic realism; the
18 19

Ibid p. 255 ibidem

contemporary ethics pragmatism is not an offensive of everything is allowed and applied ethics dont lack limits or restrictions, they rather appear as a result of a raised relationship compared to interpersonal reports. Further on, our new communicational world brings in front values that were always present in the normativity of ethics: the respect for the own person and for the other, tolerance, following public good, eco ethics etc. Relevant at a global level is the example of deontological codes covered in the recommendations of international ethic committees: the responsibility for the environment that the ecologist movements impose is accompanied by the start of eco projects at organizational level (more and more companies associating to the institutional communication a deontological vision for environmental protection). Even more, the so-called moralising stream, based on social responsibility in the process of production and consumption, to which more and more companies adhere, is being felt again through the reappearance of eco products, of healthy nourishment campaigns, of biological hygiene, of label messages that lead to recycling the packaging, or green tourism etc20. And so we are assisting at the birth of a neo-individualism in which the individual is both hedonic and tidy, willing of having an awarded freedom, but is fed up with early postmodern profusions. The beginning of the 21st century finds the contemporary man in a tidy mess, in which personal comfort and the ethics of concern offers him a new meaning to responsibility for the others. If to be would mean taking action in the interest of The Other, happiness and unhappiness of The Other build my responsibility, but the content of << to be responsible>> . I am responsible for the others state; but being responsible in a responsible way, to be responsible for my responsibility implies that I dont know what that state is. The other is the one who commands me, but I am the one that must express that command, make it audible for me.21.

20 21

Idem p. 245 Zygmund Bauman, op. cit. p. 99

Once contemporary society expresses more and more the preference for concepts like tolerance, dialogue, communication, consensus, and morality moral space become a negotiated practice between individuals capable of personal choices, of life leading rules and of moral guides in order to sustain the society in which they belong to and not vice versa. At a moral level individuals are not evaluated from their quality of members of some category that would guaranty their status of objects of moral interest. The social space is created according to the moral space for the simple reason that the objects of creating moral space are the others that we live for22. Moral postmodern man is a homo ludens that can be constrained by the rules of the game (depending on the models of moral guides that they adhere to), but can never be obliged to participate at the game. The fractal development of applied ethics and their continuous oscillation between the public and the private sphere, allows them to be at the same time unsteady, but also unitary. It is about a unity of the type of web network, often polycentric, that produces different functionalities for the social actors, based on a unemployed solidarity, that transforms otherness into correlative. The impact of this network belongs to a new humanism23. Due to a lack of authority, we assist at a comeback in close-up of the principle of happiness, included in a context of pulverised values, of organizational cultures, of deontologists that conciliate the individual regarding his self and the relationship with the others. More than ever, the moral concern is aimed at the correction of interpersonal relationship deficiencies, ethical reflection implying first of all the concrete actions of individual and society. From this world, imperatives are not missing, but they are promoted operationally, being accompanied in most of the cases by measures of applicability, compared to which the public can build an opinion. It prefigures this way an ethic less moral in a wider context in which the need of implication of different spheres of society is felt: commercial companies, mass-media, public opinion, caught in a dialogue of deontology and brand image. *

22 23

Ibid p. 181 Antonio Sandu (2009),Dimensions of ethics in postmodernity, ed. Lumen, Iai, p. 141.

Where do these brands interfere in this setup? Branding and especially the development of a brand are often associated with the creating of stability and coherence in a great change. At the level of perceiving an organizational identity, brands are seen as guidance points in an uncertain world. But on the other hand, the instability of the nowadays communicational society shows us that any identity is just as unstable as the world itself. The rate of change and innovation is so big, and the number of opposing messages about what could be so good for us so overwhelming, that we need association values with an object or a person communicated at the level of a society, that would become a sort of abbreviation for ordering our options. Immaterial attributes of a company are distinguished in economical sciences under the name of brand. The brand is the one that makes the difference, through a set of qualities, the organization and the community around it, proposing a meaning that has a lack of the imperative must. In this way, we can state that branding represents the communication of an assumed identity. Beyond the fierce mercantile message, the brands help us do that. They are acting as markers and meaning builders in an overfilled context of communication, grouping the values and characteristics of the objects in packs that can be recognised at different levels of trust or approval. This is the way through which brand philosophies are born. For the contemporary society, immaterial products, such as brands, are support for something and like we all know, what they represent often goes beyond the superficiality of mercantile product attributes.

Applied Ethics and Brand Philosophies.

In his work, Global Markets as an Ethical System24, John McMurtry puts in a new light upon consume praxis. The author states that there is no buying decision that doesnt also imply a certain moral choice and that there isnt an acquisition that isnt moral in its nature. Any buying or investment decision usually implies moral and ethical choices, states him, and a market system, by definition, must reflect society morality that establishes commerce through this system. At the level of economical philosophy there is already for some time the concept of ethic consumerism that make the express purchasing made with prejudices or minimal exploits of other persons, people or the environment. If we remember what we discussed about the ethics of care, ethic consumerism is the one practiced by a so called positive shopping. This means
24

John McMurtry (1998), Unequal Fredoms. Global Markets as an Ethical System, ed. Garamond Press, Toronto.

that, lately, at the level of any commercial act, even if its for promotional purposes like advertising, the presence of moral value is default, regarding both the brand and the consumer. Of course it is much too early to sum this type of behaviour at social level but, like recent studies show: According to the halo associated to the lately green consumption, people seem to act more responsibly at the same time with <<green>> exposure only after buying conventional products. Even so, people buy less eager and is more probably to cheat after buying eco products, compared with conventional products. Taking this into consideration, studies show that there is a tighter bond of consumption with our social and ethical behaviour in other directions than it was believed in the first time25. According to the authors, the consumption choices do not reflect only preferences regarding not only price and quality, but also, social and moral values, witnesses at a remarkable increase of global market for organic and ecological products. Based on recent research regarding the importance of social behaviour and repairing moral values, it was discovered that the simple exposure to ecological products and their acquisition would have consequences involving behaviour not only at consumption level, but at the level of its decision.

25

Nina Mazar, Chen-Bo Zhong (2007), Green Products and Ethical Behavior. Do Green Products Make Us Better People?, studiu online realizat de Universitatea din Toronto. http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/newthinking/greenproducts.pdf 03.05.2010, ora 17:26

Campanie si eveniment eco Element

Campanie CSR i eco - Samsung

In the same line of research, Gilles Lipovetsky reserves a significant part from his work (The Paradoxical Happiness and L'cran global.) to discuss about hyper consumption and the contemporary ethics, and also about how the new individual can relate with them. Considering that, for the XXI th century ethics is just another top field of the world consumption, the author speaks about the ethical products market (eco products, biodegradable products which sustains social responsability or wihch are not tested on animals etc.) in terms of their market growth.

Campanie eco V.Co-Logical - Volcom Element

Campanie CSR i eco Power to the planet

Even if in 2005 this market held between 1% and 5% (by country), since 2001 trade of such products was booming. More and more consumers claim to be aware of products made by fair trade; a significant proportion of European consumers say they are willing to pay more if the product complies with environmental or ethical standards.

Even though is increasingly concerned about his own existence, an affiliate of small communities, the modern individuals are increasingly joining social and ethical causes such as: child protection, animal protection, environmental protection, protection of the marginalised, of people from the third world countries or victims of natural disasters. From the point of view of his identity, the new hyper consumer discovers a new social dimension to this ethical commitment. So, brand communication makes an appeal to emotional consumption, to labels with a strong ethical message, to products that respect strict norms of environmental protection and engage in campaigns of social responsibility. Most of all branding refers especially to the values proposed by major corporations which are shifted to humanitarian causes, closer to the consumer, making him more responsible towards society and his self. On the other hand, consumption of the ethical products interferes with the growing emphasis on charitable activities and the rise of the NGOs geared towards the benefit of society and which serve the same responsible orientation of the new consumer. Charity balls, fundraising, programs that support marginal and disadvantaged people, celebrities involved in humanitarian activities, etc. support the perspective of more and more authors who claim that terminal stage of consumption is accomplished by the consecration of brand ethical values, an instrument of identity assertion for the neo consumer, an instrument that generates emotions per minute for charity marathons spectators. Between hedonism and disinterest, individualism and altruism, idealism and spectacle, consumerism and generosity there is no longer any antagonism, our era showing nothing but confusion regarding old borders, towards the great happiness of the sentimentalist and media hyper consume. On the other hand, in a world full of various brands, antagonism is always present. Beyond a generalized culture of welfare and comfort in which the consumer goes, and beyond the empathy that he feelsepisodic and from distance to his fellow man, you can read his constant need to criticize. The contemporary space, dominated by a strong tendency to value scepticism -reminiscent of postmodernism - doesnt find any field "away from consumer complaints and protests?"

According to Lipovesky's vision, todays individuals are against advertising colonisation, of persuasion and operated standardization at any level, they are anxious about the novice waves of the mobiles phones and microwaves, transgenic food and polluting products that are causing riots (hence the development of organic food market), people are talking against the proliferation of suburban telephone messages, the hordes of tourists, the ugliness of supermarkets, the television is accused of transforming us into some half-witted, and advertising, transforming us in the sheep of Panurge The portrait of a new man in a branded world As already stated in the first part, the hyper-consumer is an individual who has learned to refuse, an individual who takes a stand against everything that displeases him, looking for authenticity at any levels of its existence. In this context, a brand philosophy has a duty and in the same times the advantage to seize public discontent by proposing viable alternatives. With a polished speech of advertising communication and social responsibility as a controlling value, the regulations, the principles and the rules of conduct proposed are transforming a brand into an educator of the masses and a guide in finding the answer to the question how to best live your life? The answer to this question has become, in fact, a matter of choice for each responsible individual that seeks to find his/her comfort in the contemporary world. Here for example, we have a mission statement of the "Make it count!" part of the brand philosophy brand Element: The Make it count collection celebrates constancy, determination and the deep roots of the brand Element. It represents the importance of the fact to be grateful and to the approach of your actions with depth. Leave your mark deep enough that the world will be a better place! Make your actions count!26 Motivational prescriptions and guiding rules of conduct mould our decisions under the shape of campaign slogans: You are Volcom, do your job, recycle!, Green works Panasonic, Live. Learn. Grow Element, Connecting people Nokia, Sharp Minds Sharp, Come alive! Youre in the Pepsi generation Pepsi, Think different! Apple, The Power to Be Your Best Apple, Together we can do more Orange, Impossible is nothing Adidas, Nothing is too small to know, and nothing too big to attempt Element.

26

Sursa online www.elementskateboards.com 10.05.2010, ora 17:23

In a consumer culture people dont buy for functional satisfaction anymore, but the consumption becomes a meaning carrier, and brands are in most of the cases used as symbolic resources for identity construction and maintenance.27. The increasing involvement of brand philosophies at the level of a community is noticeable even at the level of new reports that are established between a hyper-consumer and the others. At first sight it can be reproached to the contemporary individual that he pulled back into a selfish individualism, preoccupied only by his own person, his security and health, paying tribute through some abilities through which they escape from the daily and, so, from civic spirit. Even more than this, he is constantly accused of frivolity with which he treats his close ones, interpersonal relationships being nothing more than conjectural partnerships. But if we take a closer look, contemporary society, presents a strong altruistic character, and even a humanistic one, proof standing the increasing preoccupations for human rights, the ideal of tolerance, philanthropy, charity events and donations. The new individual rejects violence and cruelty and has an increasing predilection for online interactivity websites and social media (Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn etc.). Through this path, the individual is no longer alone, more and more sections of his social life joining the same desiderate: human interaction while content exposure. Although more preoccupied by his own person, transposed in the undeniably search for his wellbeing through the products he selects to consume, the hyper-consumer feels a strong empathy for the other. He interacts more vividly in the social sphere and the world of the online has become for him the new agora. Although many theorists still see the new individual as being an occasionally philanthropist, ethic values such as tolerance (preached by social advertising, online social media and CSR campaigns) are more and more present in the contemporary world as voices of a new type of public. Today we see that certain problems that could have been considerate of secondary interest for a brand suddenly become primary headlines. People dont choose anymore what is better, fashionable or cheaper. They choose brands that have a reprehensive relevance for them. For example, several years ago Nike brought on to the market skate shoes models that could easily
27

n a consumer culture people no longer consume for merely functional satisfaction, but consumption becomes meaning-based, and brands are often used as symbolic resources for the construction and maintenance of identity. Elliott & Davies, sursa online: http://www.idbranding.com/ l07.05.2010 ora 20:20, traducere personal

compete against skateboarding equipments such as Etnies. Still, a skater wouldnt have worn Nike. Why? Because, in the skaters community Nike wasnt seen as a brand that could represent their values or that could take the shape of their (brand) cultures beliefs. Nike had a different target, and a pair of Nike in the feet of a skater would have sent an ambiguous message to both communities. Identity is conceived therefore not as a product of a certain social system, neither as a fixed entity that the individual can purely adopt, but as something that the person can create actively, partially, through consumption28. If the promoting campaigns focused around creating an external image of the brand, in an age in which transparency is the leading word, consumers will not buy external brand images, but will look more and more to personalize the speech communicated by them, trying to find what the brand really reprezents for their beliefs. The hiperconsumers openness is not limited to the objects or their utility, but, despite the spacial and temporal dispersion (as an intimate space) and sometimes by social class, it aims very powerfull (and visible) to the one next to us, looking for a generalized comfort of the community. The contribution of advertising in this way refferes to the openness of the communication forms of non-profit organizations by mass-media channels, but especially through the individuals sensibilization through calls and messages that are open for tolerance and acceptance. Even more than this, contemporany advertising is aimed towards an open and empathic communication regarding any cause (it can be said that it is the new battlefield of social ideology)

28

Richard Elliot, Kritsadarat Wattanasuwan (1998), Brands as Symbolic Resources for the Construction of Identity. n International Journal of Advertising (II, no. 2).