Media isn't actually a "thing." It has the same etymological root as "medium"--the size between "small" and "large" as well as "psychic medium." Media, in other words, has no real substance of its own. It's the thing that's in between speaking and hearing; transmission and reception.
By way of articles, studies, and a couple of polls and links, this blog examines the significance of media in American culture. Post your thoughts after the jump.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Read Mercer Schuchardt's "The Perfect Icon for an Imperfect Post-Literate World"
This is quite interesting, yet a little chilling. The idea that we are almost becoming more complicated forms of the Pavlov's dogs, salivating for their products every time the bell of big business rings. It just shows how primal we still are, even though most people will probably fight you on it. We are creatures of instinct and we have just masked it with knowledge and prowess. the idea that the image transcends language because the image screams 'swoosh' is also quite amazing. The image exudes 'swoosh' to the point where the writing of it can be described by the sound. Just when you start to think that your uncovering all the tricks that big business is using to brain wash us it unravels another question with a hideous answer. Scary stuff
This article is eye opening to me. For years I have been attracted to Nike and their products, and I had no idea why. Then this article explained it to me and no matter how much I tried to deny it, I knew it was true. I wear Nike products to feel more athletic, I started to wear them for athletics but slowly over time I began to wear them all the time for any use. I think part of it was due to injuries, as I have mentioned in one of my papers, I have had a number of serious injuries. From tearing muscles in my back to spraining ankles to dislocating knee caps and shoulders, you name it I have probably done it (excluding breaking bones other than fingers and toes). These injuries have stopped me from playing sports as much as I would like to over the last five or so years. In order to feel like I was still involved in sports I went to the easiest solution, wear Nike athletic gear. It makes you look and feel more athletic. It just feels right. The strangest thing about this article was while I was reading it I looked down and what was staring right at me? You guessed it the big swoosh. Brand names and icons are becoming a social statement, if you wear Nike you look athletic, if you wear Polo you look classy, and if you wear no name brands you look like a no name. It is sad that our society has come to this, but it has and for the most part we are all guilty of believing in it. If you can honestly tell me that if you see a normal guy walking around in all Nike and you do not jump to the conclusion that he plays sports or is athletic in general, then good for you, however you are a rarity and an outlier to the general trend.
After reading this article by Read Mercer Schuchardt it is incredible how true everything she says is. The world we live in now is all symbols; brands and companies trying to get their message across as fast as possible to the public. In doing so they try to use the least amount of words as possible. As it talks about the Nike symbol it states it is an “unbreakable mental link between the swoosh image and the company’s name”. This is completely true as for I am sure everyone I know, as soon as they see that symbol they think of Nike. They think of Nike shoes, the clothing brand, and the athletes represented by Nike. Nike is one of the most known brands in the world and they get their message across without any words needed. It blew my mind that this giant corporation went from a student getting paid $25 to create it in 1971 and now is this billion dollar corporation. The author stated the three things a great product needed, “First, consider the strength of the Swoosh as an icon. The Swoosh is a simple shape that produces well at any size, in any color, and on almost any surface-three critical elements for a corporate logo”. This just showed to prove his point that no words are required to advertise a product; with a well-developed logo you don’t need anything else. The logo speaks for itself. The article went on to later say that the problem with many advertisements is too many words leading to “clutter”. This doesn’t draw in the audience like a well-defined symbol does. All in all it seems that the best advertisement is one with as few amount of words as possible while still getting your message across.
It is truly amazing, what Read Mercer Schuchardt is saying. It is crazy enough that we, as a society have made the connections that a symbol, as seemingly meaningless as the Nike “swoosh,” is the symbol for one of the most well-known companies in the world; But then he compares this to Pavlov’s bell, comparing this association to that of a dog expecting a stimuli. I do certainly agree that companies like Nike design their logos and other sales symbols in such a way that we make the connection to the company that uses it. After all, the best way to get sales, is to get your customers to think about your company, and why they should support it. The idea that he states that really got my attention, was when he compared company logos to symbols that represent religion. In fact, companies may act very similar to those of the Christians who used the text less symbol of the fish. Much in the same way, the company can use the “swoosh” symbol as a means to manipulate people, or to simply get their attention, and to associate themselves with Nike’s products, while still maintaining plausible deniability that it is simply a symbol, nothing more. I actually cringed thinking about this, because if this is true, companies today may be even more devious than we think. I just hope, for our sake, that this was simply a metaphor.
As unsettling that this article may be to read, it isn’t too far off from the truth. The interesting point that Schuchardt expresses of Nike reaching the level it is in terms of universal recognition without the use of words. When you have and ad in only one language, you ultimately limit yourself to only reaching the audience that can read or understand who or what the ad is about. However, once you eliminate this language barrier, and instead create a universal symbol you allow your brand to reach a whole other level of recognition (with about a fraction of the cost compared to traditional meathods). The utilization of even such a simple image as the nike “swoosh” is now able to reach people all over the world, without even having to pay the money to translate the ad to rather a greater audience. Apple has also utilized this concept by sub consciously telling us that a computer or mp3 player is of higher quality now that it has the apple logo on it, compared to a device that doesn’t. The biggest point, I believe, that should be taken from this article is Schuchardt’s statement (when talking about the persecuted Christians) that “the fish could’ve meant anything or nothing” when the Christ text was dropped. The fish could have meant anything or nothing, and yet people at the time still chose to associate it with Christ as if they were conditioned to do so.
This article made a lot of sense to me. It wasn't too long ago that it seemed every company was attempting to change from a saying or slogan over to a symbol alone. It also makes sense as to why companies would want to do this, seeing as how busy we always are and when you have so much text thrown at you all the time it's easy to miss things. So advertisers change to a symbol that will not be so easily overlooked. I liked how Schuchardt compares people buying products due to seeing a symbol to the training of Pavlov's dogs, and the scary part is that we are actually being "trained" in that way. I know people that will only buy products, such as Nike, that have the symbol somewhere on the product. The companies also have the upper hand with advertising this way because there is no language barrier when it come to using images such as the "Swoosh", therefore saving time and money when advertising globally. I feel that Schuchardt was accurate in describing us as having been given partial lobotomies by Nike and other such companies, because in reality, so many people buy products based on symbol alone with no real thought being put into what brand their purchasing and why.
Symbols can be used for many things and some are even recognized around the world. Corporate giants like Nike have established a symbol that needs no words, and can be picked out of a group and named. “Eventually created an unbreakable mental link between the Swoosh image and the companies name.” This quote from Read Mercer Schuchardt really shows how the world can view symbols. The part that I found particularly interesting was how the word Swoosh was capitalized in the article as if it were a proper noun. How can that possibly be? A word to describe a symbol is now recognized in the dictionary with its origins coming from, you guessed it, Nike. The base for this phenomenon is advertising. Nike spends tons of money on promoting their brand. The advertising can come on many different fronts, everything from television commercials to athletes that wear the brand during their sporting event. Personally I think that the best way of advertising is the utilization of the athletes. When watching a sporting event usually the cameraman always zooms in on the athlete and the brand is prominently displayed. This makes people including myself, want to buy the brand because we want to be that athlete and maybe even look like them as well. These corporate giants have mastered the art of combining the meaning of a symbol with the actual symbol, even to the extent that it is recognized worldwide.
The first logo I thought of when I started to read this article was the Nike swoosh and it didn’t surprise me at all that it was the main logo the author had talked about. At first I couldn’t comprehend how Nike had “created an unbreakable mental link between the Swoosh image and the company’s name.” as stated by Read Mercer Schuchardt in his article “The Perfect Icon for an Imperfect Post-Literate World.” But then I realized the Swoosh has no other meaning to me other than a symbol of athleticism simply because that’s how it’s been advertised to me since I was born. The thought that a company like Nike could manipulate so many people’s minds to create the link between the Swoosh symbol and their product line with no added text is a little frightening. It almost feels like this could be the start of a more hieroglyphic form of language that is recognizable by everyone around the world. It’s also unnerving that companies can create logos such as Pepsi’s new logo that had previous meaning and completely change the first image that comes to my mind when people see that particular symbol. It makes me curious to think what South Koreans first think when they see the new Pepsi logo as I believe they will be the only ones who may not think of Pepsi first. Whatever they may think of the logo nearly every other person familiar with the new logo now no longer knows it as the South Korean flag, or the yin and yang sign but the first recognize it as the Pepsi logo and is a sign of globalization and almost a development of a global language that uses symbols to associate with different items or brands.
This is quite interesting, yet a little chilling. The idea that we are almost becoming more complicated forms of the Pavlov's dogs, salivating for their products every time the bell of big business rings. It just shows how primal we still are, even though most people will probably fight you on it. We are creatures of instinct and we have just masked it with knowledge and prowess. the idea that the image transcends language because the image screams 'swoosh' is also quite amazing. The image exudes 'swoosh' to the point where the writing of it can be described by the sound. Just when you start to think that your uncovering all the tricks that big business is using to brain wash us it unravels another question with a hideous answer. Scary stuff
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis article is eye opening to me. For years I have been attracted to Nike and their products, and I had no idea why. Then this article explained it to me and no matter how much I tried to deny it, I knew it was true. I wear Nike products to feel more athletic, I started to wear them for athletics but slowly over time I began to wear them all the time for any use. I think part of it was due to injuries, as I have mentioned in one of my papers, I have had a number of serious injuries. From tearing muscles in my back to spraining ankles to dislocating knee caps and shoulders, you name it I have probably done it (excluding breaking bones other than fingers and toes). These injuries have stopped me from playing sports as much as I would like to over the last five or so years. In order to feel like I was still involved in sports I went to the easiest solution, wear Nike athletic gear. It makes you look and feel more athletic. It just feels right. The strangest thing about this article was while I was reading it I looked down and what was staring right at me? You guessed it the big swoosh. Brand names and icons are becoming a social statement, if you wear Nike you look athletic, if you wear Polo you look classy, and if you wear no name brands you look like a no name. It is sad that our society has come to this, but it has and for the most part we are all guilty of believing in it. If you can honestly tell me that if you see a normal guy walking around in all Nike and you do not jump to the conclusion that he plays sports or is athletic in general, then good for you, however you are a rarity and an outlier to the general trend.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article by Read Mercer Schuchardt it is incredible how true everything she says is. The world we live in now is all symbols; brands and companies trying to get their message across as fast as possible to the public. In doing so they try to use the least amount of words as possible. As it talks about the Nike symbol it states it is an “unbreakable mental link between the swoosh image and the company’s name”. This is completely true as for I am sure everyone I know, as soon as they see that symbol they think of Nike. They think of Nike shoes, the clothing brand, and the athletes represented by Nike. Nike is one of the most known brands in the world and they get their message across without any words needed. It blew my mind that this giant corporation went from a student getting paid $25 to create it in 1971 and now is this billion dollar corporation. The author stated the three things a great product needed, “First, consider the strength of the Swoosh as an icon. The Swoosh is a simple shape that produces well at any size, in any color, and on almost any surface-three critical elements for a corporate logo”. This just showed to prove his point that no words are required to advertise a product; with a well-developed logo you don’t need anything else. The logo speaks for itself. The article went on to later say that the problem with many advertisements is too many words leading to “clutter”. This doesn’t draw in the audience like a well-defined symbol does. All in all it seems that the best advertisement is one with as few amount of words as possible while still getting your message across.
ReplyDeleteIt is truly amazing, what Read Mercer Schuchardt is saying. It is crazy enough that we, as a society have made the connections that a symbol, as seemingly meaningless as the Nike “swoosh,” is the symbol for one of the most well-known companies in the world; But then he compares this to Pavlov’s bell, comparing this association to that of a dog expecting a stimuli. I do certainly agree that companies like Nike design their logos and other sales symbols in such a way that we make the connection to the company that uses it. After all, the best way to get sales, is to get your customers to think about your company, and why they should support it. The idea that he states that really got my attention, was when he compared company logos to symbols that represent religion. In fact, companies may act very similar to those of the Christians who used the text less symbol of the fish. Much in the same way, the company can use the “swoosh” symbol as a means to manipulate people, or to simply get their attention, and to associate themselves with Nike’s products, while still maintaining plausible deniability that it is simply a symbol, nothing more. I actually cringed thinking about this, because if this is true, companies today may be even more devious than we think. I just hope, for our sake, that this was simply a metaphor.
ReplyDeleteAs unsettling that this article may be to read, it isn’t too far off from the truth. The interesting point that Schuchardt expresses of Nike reaching the level it is in terms of universal recognition without the use of words. When you have and ad in only one language, you ultimately limit yourself to only reaching the audience that can read or understand who or what the ad is about. However, once you eliminate this language barrier, and instead create a universal symbol you allow your brand to reach a whole other level of recognition (with about a fraction of the cost compared to traditional meathods). The utilization of even such a simple image as the nike “swoosh” is now able to reach people all over the world, without even having to pay the money to translate the ad to rather a greater audience. Apple has also utilized this concept by sub consciously telling us that a computer or mp3 player is of higher quality now that it has the apple logo on it, compared to a device that doesn’t. The biggest point, I believe, that should be taken from this article is Schuchardt’s statement (when talking about the persecuted Christians) that “the fish could’ve meant anything or nothing” when the Christ text was dropped. The fish could have meant anything or nothing, and yet people at the time still chose to associate it with Christ as if they were conditioned to do so.
ReplyDeleteThis article made a lot of sense to me. It wasn't too long ago that it seemed every company was attempting to change from a saying or slogan over to a symbol alone. It also makes sense as to why companies would want to do this, seeing as how busy we always are and when you have so much text thrown at you all the time it's easy to miss things. So advertisers change to a symbol that will not be so easily overlooked. I liked how Schuchardt compares people buying products due to seeing a symbol to the training of Pavlov's dogs, and the scary part is that we are actually being "trained" in that way. I know people that will only buy products, such as Nike, that have the symbol somewhere on the product. The companies also have the upper hand with advertising this way because there is no language barrier when it come to using images such as the "Swoosh", therefore saving time and money when advertising globally. I feel that Schuchardt was accurate in describing us as having been given partial lobotomies by Nike and other such companies, because in reality, so many people buy products based on symbol alone with no real thought being put into what brand their purchasing and why.
ReplyDeleteSymbols can be used for many things and some are even recognized around the world. Corporate giants like Nike have established a symbol that needs no words, and can be picked out of a group and named. “Eventually created an unbreakable mental link between the Swoosh image and the companies name.” This quote from Read Mercer Schuchardt really shows how the world can view symbols. The part that I found particularly interesting was how the word Swoosh was capitalized in the article as if it were a proper noun. How can that possibly be? A word to describe a symbol is now recognized in the dictionary with its origins coming from, you guessed it, Nike. The base for this phenomenon is advertising. Nike spends tons of money on promoting their brand. The advertising can come on many different fronts, everything from television commercials to athletes that wear the brand during their sporting event. Personally I think that the best way of advertising is the utilization of the athletes. When watching a sporting event usually the cameraman always zooms in on the athlete and the brand is prominently displayed. This makes people including myself, want to buy the brand because we want to be that athlete and maybe even look like them as well. These corporate giants have mastered the art of combining the meaning of a symbol with the actual symbol, even to the extent that it is recognized worldwide.
ReplyDeleteThe first logo I thought of when I started to read this article was the Nike swoosh and it didn’t surprise me at all that it was the main logo the author had talked about. At first I couldn’t comprehend how Nike had “created an unbreakable mental link between the Swoosh image and the company’s name.” as stated by Read Mercer Schuchardt in his article “The Perfect Icon for an Imperfect Post-Literate World.” But then I realized the Swoosh has no other meaning to me other than a symbol of athleticism simply because that’s how it’s been advertised to me since I was born. The thought that a company like Nike could manipulate so many people’s minds to create the link between the Swoosh symbol and their product line with no added text is a little frightening. It almost feels like this could be the start of a more hieroglyphic form of language that is recognizable by everyone around the world. It’s also unnerving that companies can create logos such as Pepsi’s new logo that had previous meaning and completely change the first image that comes to my mind when people see that particular symbol. It makes me curious to think what South Koreans first think when they see the new Pepsi logo as I believe they will be the only ones who may not think of Pepsi first. Whatever they may think of the logo nearly every other person familiar with the new logo now no longer knows it as the South Korean flag, or the yin and yang sign but the first recognize it as the Pepsi logo and is a sign of globalization and almost a development of a global language that uses symbols to associate with different items or brands.
ReplyDelete