From No Logo by Naomi Klein
Note: *Digital Read **I will soon be uploading the book in its entirety.
URL: http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/fiaYdi
Opening:
“A democratic system of education… is one of the surest ways of creating and greately extending markets for goods of all kinds and especially those goods in which fashion may play a part.” -Ex-adman James Rorty, Our Master’s Voice, 1934
Although the brands seem to be everywhere - at kids’ concerts, next to them on the couch, on the state with their heroes, in their on-line chat groups, and on their playing fields and basket ball courts - for along time one major unbranded youth frontier remained: a place where young people gathered, talked, sneaked smokes, made out, formed opinions and, most maddeningly of all, stood around looking cool for hours on end. That place is called school. And clearly, the brands had to get into the schools.
“You’ll agree that the youth market is an untapped wellspring of new revenue. You’ll also agree that the youth market spends the majority of each day inside the schoolhouse. Now the problem is, how do you reach that market?” ask a typically tantalizing brochure from the Fourth Annual Kid Power Marketing Conference.
As we have just seen, marketers and cool hunters have spent the better part of the decade hustling the brands back to high school and pouring them into the template of the teenage outlaw. Several of the most successful brands had even cast their corporate headquarters as private schools, referring to them as “campuses” and, at the Nike World Campus, nicknaming one edifice “the student union building.” Even the cool hunters are going highbrow; by the late nineties, the rage in the industry was to recast oneself less as a trendy club-hopper than as a bookish grad student. In fact, some insist they aren’t cool hunters at all but rather “urban anthropologists.”
And yet despite their up-to-the-minute outfits and intellectual pretensions, the brands and their keepers still found themselves on the wrong side of the school gate, a truly intolerable state of affairs and one that would not last long. American marketing consultant Jack Myers described the insufferable slight like this: “The choice we have in this country [the U.S.] is for our educational system to join the electronic age and communicate to the students in ways they can understand and to which they can relate. Our schools can continue to use outmoded forms of communications and become the daytime prisons for millions of young people, as they have become in the inner cities.” This reasoning, which badly equates corporate access to the schools with access to modern technology, and extension to the future itself, is at the core of how the brands have managed, over the course of only one decade, to all but eliminate the barrier between ads and education. It was technology that lent a new urgency to nineties chronic underfunding: at the same time as schools were facing ever-deeper budget cuts, the costs of delivering a modern education were rising steeply, forcing many educators to look to alternative funding sources for help. Swept up by the info-tech hype, schools that couldn’t afford up-to-date text books were suddenly expected to provide students with audiovisual equipment, video cameras, classroom computers, desktop publishing capacity, the latest educational software programs, Internet access - even, at some schools, video-conferencing.