Saturday, May 14, 2005
Has Christianity Become a Brand?
A while back I read a book - Branded Nation. Frankly, reading it made me very unhappy. We'll explore why here a little bit.
Essentially, branding is a way of distinguishing products that are essentially indistinguishable. That is not how it started, but that is what it has come to mean.
Let's talk about how it started. We'll talk about a industry I know a little something about -- food. When a producer grows food, the quality of the harvest varies, even across a field. Subsequently, when the harvest gets to the canning plant, it is sorted. The best stuff is canned as the "premium" brand. Lesser stuff is canned as other brands and sold for a slightly cheaper price. For example -- if you by "Green Giant LaSeur Peas" you are getting the best canned peas money can buy. Peas from the same harvest and canning plant, that are not as good, is what you find in the "Safeway Brand" peas. At least that was the story 30 years ago, I have no idea if it is still true.
Why would it not still be true? Well, it seems that marketers discovered that people often "buy brands" regardless of what is actually under the label. This is what underlies much of the clothing industry. You can buy a shirt with a Ralph Lauren label and it will cost about twice as much as a label-less shirt -- even if it came from the same clothing manufacturer in Mexico or Taiwan.
Anymore, marketers work to establish a brand reputation, and once that is done, the product itself is often immaterial. Thus we now have "Cherry Vanilla Dr. Pepper" which tastes nothing at all like Dr. Pepper, but they don't care; what they are selling is the DP brand, not the soda itself.
So what does this have to do with Christianity?
Well since the Reformation there have been things resembling brands within Christianity -- we call them denominations. I would and will argue that they were brands in the traditional sense, that is to say there were real and genuine distinctions between them, like with LaSeur peas and Safeway peas. I wonder if that is still true? There are serious questions here. If the brand is more important than the contents behind the label, as is true in many consumer products, then there is a huge problem in the church.
As religion, and particularly Christianity, has gained an active role in politics, I wonder if Christianity itself has been reduced to a brand that the political parties can banter about. If this is true, then it is possible the brand focus will rob not just some denominations, but Christianity itself, of its actual content.
I am planning a couple of more posts on this topic -- one on intra-Christianity branding -- that is looking at denominations and the mega-church and emerging church movements in light of branding. The other on "Christianity" itself becoming a political brand.
I'll link to them as they come up. Hopefully you will enjoy this series. I look forward to your coments and ideas.
Essentially, branding is a way of distinguishing products that are essentially indistinguishable. That is not how it started, but that is what it has come to mean.
Let's talk about how it started. We'll talk about a industry I know a little something about -- food. When a producer grows food, the quality of the harvest varies, even across a field. Subsequently, when the harvest gets to the canning plant, it is sorted. The best stuff is canned as the "premium" brand. Lesser stuff is canned as other brands and sold for a slightly cheaper price. For example -- if you by "Green Giant LaSeur Peas" you are getting the best canned peas money can buy. Peas from the same harvest and canning plant, that are not as good, is what you find in the "Safeway Brand" peas. At least that was the story 30 years ago, I have no idea if it is still true.
Why would it not still be true? Well, it seems that marketers discovered that people often "buy brands" regardless of what is actually under the label. This is what underlies much of the clothing industry. You can buy a shirt with a Ralph Lauren label and it will cost about twice as much as a label-less shirt -- even if it came from the same clothing manufacturer in Mexico or Taiwan.
Anymore, marketers work to establish a brand reputation, and once that is done, the product itself is often immaterial. Thus we now have "Cherry Vanilla Dr. Pepper" which tastes nothing at all like Dr. Pepper, but they don't care; what they are selling is the DP brand, not the soda itself.
So what does this have to do with Christianity?
Well since the Reformation there have been things resembling brands within Christianity -- we call them denominations. I would and will argue that they were brands in the traditional sense, that is to say there were real and genuine distinctions between them, like with LaSeur peas and Safeway peas. I wonder if that is still true? There are serious questions here. If the brand is more important than the contents behind the label, as is true in many consumer products, then there is a huge problem in the church.
As religion, and particularly Christianity, has gained an active role in politics, I wonder if Christianity itself has been reduced to a brand that the political parties can banter about. If this is true, then it is possible the brand focus will rob not just some denominations, but Christianity itself, of its actual content.
I am planning a couple of more posts on this topic -- one on intra-Christianity branding -- that is looking at denominations and the mega-church and emerging church movements in light of branding. The other on "Christianity" itself becoming a political brand.
I'll link to them as they come up. Hopefully you will enjoy this series. I look forward to your coments and ideas.
