Who decides what is a brand? - Yaw Nsarkoh writes
Abantu,
In discussing the definition of brands and branding we seem to go back to all those many years ago when we were told: There was no African history pre-European contact because it was not written in books like they did in Europe.
Advertisement
That there was no such thing as African philosophy. Because it was not possible for proverbs and wise sayings to be the basis of philosophy.
Yet, the same people accepted Greek fragments (a.k.a. proverbs) as the basis of philosophy.
That Africa had no languages just gaggle. Our forests were jungles.
We were natives, the Metropole had only citizens. They had fashion, style and clothing, we had costumes.
The Metropole brought God, Africans were supposed to have only fetishes.
That there was no such thing as African literature, etc. And the imperialist beat goes on!
Who is saying this attempt to cut out the cultural experience of Africans and indeed all peoples of the Periphery, is the definition of branding? Western culture? Neoliberalism? Imperialism? The Metropole?
I say, in 333BC, in Thebes (Ancient Egypt), there was branding of baskets. And advertising was done for these baskets.
This is long before Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, Sorbonne, etc. even came into existence.
Are we in danger of over-commoditising brands? Of ceding to neoliberal capitalism what a brand is?
Are we being too subservient again to Western societies dictating the principles of organisation and parameters of discourse?
For the social relations that govern the means of production and distribution/marketing?
I argue that Revolutions are brands. Why are they not? They stand for clear ideas around liberation and offer solutions for society.
Fidel, Raul, Che and the peasants and workers of the Los Barbudoes are and were a global brand.
The impact of that movement on liberation in the Periphery (Global South) has been smothered by the media and academic sources of imperialism.
This is just one example. So, is the Land and Freedom Movement which greatly took on colonialism in East Africa. And orchestrated revolution from the Mountains of Kenya, ably led by Field Marshal Dedan Kimathi, General Mathenge, etc. And most importantly was powered courageously by "ordinary" women and men.
People driven to fight to the death to emphasise their rights to live in liberty, egalitarian opportunity and dignity, and true fraternity.
So exemplary was this movement that it influenced thinking even in the United States civil rights struggle. Malcolm X in particular spoke a lot about his admiration of what was nicknamed the Mau Mau.
Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Micere Mugo and many others have done an outstanding job in keeping the memory and lessons of this movement alive.
Advertisement
Viewed particularly against the brutal neocolonial nature of Kenya under Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel Arap Moi and even up to now, these people must be commended.
The nationalist movements were brands. All brands can derail. Hence the disappearance or decimation of once all conquering Enron, Arthur-Anderson, General Electric, Nokia and the British Empire, as well as the Roman Empire.
Religion, another example, is branding: Logo (cross, crescent, etc), Idea (eg. Love your neighbour as yourself), Communication framework (eg Quran, Bible, etc) , Experience (Temple, shrine, church, mosque, etc) and the priests are the militants and revolutionary campaigners.
Why is Manyhia palace or the Kabaka's palace not a brand?
Advertisement
The intangible shall prevail over the tangible. Ideas are eternal, the physical is transient.
Branding and philosophy are intertwined. Dipped in a regenerative way to provide real solutions for the long term health of society, you have a brand.
At its most purposeful and finest, this is it. Branding is a much bigger thing than punting stuff to make commercial targets.
Theodore Levitt made this point decisively, vigorously and correctly in his famous article published in 1960, Marketing Myopia.
Advertisement
Branding is not just the caricature that transactional commercialisation makes it seem. A sterile chase for profiteering.
Branding is a much more respectful activity of human society to cement identity. It happens everywhere and in every aspect of society.
I fall on Ngugi urging us to move the centre. Or Samir Amin calling for a differentiated polycentric approach; one planet, many systems.
There is a fixation by aspects of the African elites, with ideas from the West, in neocolonial and neoliberal Africa. As though only the West or the Metropole has agency in thought.
Some seem to think that a billionaire in Africa is only one if Forbes magazine reports one as such. That if Kantar, Nielsen, Hollywood, Milward Brown, Robinson Crusoe or Don Quixote does not recognise it as such then it is not a brand.
It strains on to many African intellectuals being embarrassed when they cannot pronounce a European name properly. Forgetting that very few in the Metropole can pronounce Xhosa or Twi properly.
I know many who feel embarrassed they cannot knot bow-ties but worry not that they cannot handle their own cultural fashion.
This has been a very engaging conversation, in my view. With so many senior brand builders here, I have a suggestion.
We, I suggest, owe it to the continent and to the profession. We should produce books, podcasts and so on to engage in the debate more. By Africa and on our own terms.
On the last line, I will come back with a proposal. Best wishes.