Celebrity Branding

On a daily basis the American public is bombarded with "News" stories about the lives of "famous" people. Perhaps from a selfish perspective, I tend to dismiss these stories as umimportant with a nonchalant "who cares" type of reaction. After all, I will not be invited to Britney Spears wedding. nor will I be expected to send a baby gift for Angelina Jolie's new addition. But the fact that these stories appear on a daily basis indicates that someone does care about these stories. In a society in which supply and demand dictate the offerings in the market, if there was no demand for this information, there would be no stories worth publishing.

A closer look at this phenonenom reveals more about our culture than I would have thought. Like any consumer product, an image or brand is developed and nurtured that tells us what this product is and what it means. This is reinforced through various images and a barrage of messages regarding this product. Over the course of time these images are linked to the products and the associations created result in their purchase.

Consumerism generally refers to goods and services that have been created resulting from some unmet need in society. How does this concept become transferred to human beings? Obviously we are not creating the person, (although genetic engineering may solve this dilemma in the future). The answer appears to be how the image of this person is being formed and shaped. These images are not present at birth, but result from some God given talent or skill that this person may develop. (Children of celebrities are an exception to this, such as Paris Hilton). These skills generally have some entertainment value, (singers, actors, athletes), and once recognized, the branding begins. The skills are associated with the person and the image develops in the same way a new product is introduced. In this case the person is not the product, but their services or skills become the product.

An example of this in the sporting arena is Michael Jordan. "Branding" Michael Jordan created a desire to see him play basketball, in turn creating a demand for tickets to the Bull's games. This increased his value to the Bull's and subsequently increased the salary that the Bulls were willing to pay him. This also created more opportunites in merchandising sales as well as promotional appeal in the form of endorsements. This image of Michael Jordan has now been transferred to such companies as Nike, allowing them to capitalize on his branding. Consumers do not buy Michael Jordan, but they do buy goods and services derived from this image that has been created. Perhaps this can be expressed by one of the phrases coined by Nike in this process: "Be Like Mike". Wearing a jersey with his name, or attending a game in which he played may be the equivalent of purchasing a product that we "need". By associating ourselves with Michael Jordan, we are trained to believe that we have satisfied some unmet need to be like Mike. The commercialization of MJ has essentially programmed us to believe this to be true.

The branding process generally creates this concept of "need" for goods or service. Through the images received we are convinced that we "need" a certain product. We now "need" Air Jordan sneakers although in reality what we need is some basic protection for our feet. Through the power of marketing and advertising these needs have been extended into personalities. This concept is more allusive to me, as personally I do not want to be like Mike. In fact, for all of the publicity and information we recieve about Michael Jordan, I have no idea who he is. I know that he is a fantastic basketball player. I also know that I am not a good basketball player and I will never be a good basketball player. Therefore, no matter what the marketers are telling me, I cannot be like Mike.

With this in mind I have tried to understand our cultures continued facsination with celebrities. Is this an attempt to live precariously through someone else? Do we want to imitate these "stars" in the hope that we can have what they have (notriety or wealth)? Are these people heroes that should be worhiped and emulated, or are they merely ordinary people with extraordinary talents? I would argue that the branding of these people has elevated them to a status beyond their talents. I would also argue that because of this, their influence on consumers is disproportionate. Because someone has a great singing voice, should their opinions on abortion or the war in Iraq influence public policy? People should be influenced by those with those whom they are closest too. They should look to people whom they admire and respect because of who they are, and not what they can do. Our society needs to recognize celebrities for what they are, and not for the image that is being constructed by their personal marketers (publicists).