BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Did 'No Logo' change anything?

 
 
Ellis
13:10 / 06.09.01
I bought "No Logo" as I am sure quite a few people on the forum did, as well as a fair few other people, and it was well recieved by the press (or at least the quotes on the back would lead you to believe) and Naomi Klein certaily got a good few interviews out of it.

But did it change anything?

Did the people who bought and read the book stop buying McDonalds and Nike?

Did it lead to companies changing policies on foreign workers?

Did you?
 
 
Vitamin-C
13:25 / 06.09.01
i bought a copy of 'no logo' for auto-pilot disengaged earlier this year. and he is actually refusing to read it because he believes that when he does he'll have to stop buying McD's and nike etc. and he says he doesn't wanna have to go through a major guilt trip like that at the moment. but he does intend to read it one day...apparently.
 
 
Dee Vapr
13:39 / 06.09.01
I've certainly been protesting Nike, Gap, McDonalds, Starbucks amongst others. Which is not difficult anyway, because I hate their clothes / food. This kind of protest is riddled with moral thorns tho - if you wanted to be morally "watertight" you'd pretty much have to opt out of western society seeing as MOST of our banks / chainstores / corporations indulge in unethical practices in one way or the other.

[ 06-09-2001: Message edited by: Dee Vapr ]
 
 
autopilot disengaged
13:42 / 06.09.01
oh godddd: that is so low i'm gonna have to buy you a pair of logoless platforms.

ok: i admit it: i am a bad person. i am a fully-paid up decadent citizen of the evil empire. i am a mindless piece of lumbering two-legged cattle. i have a (two-year old) nike jacket. it's all truuuue.

but it wasn't always this way.

i can get better.

i know i can. honestly
 
 
Vitamin-C
13:53 / 06.09.01
i get this 'i can get better...' speech from autopilot everytime he's drunk. he'll just be sitting there with his nike tracksuit, holding a can of carling black label, and wiping the McDonalds burger relish from his lips...and i just know he's gonna launch into it.

frankly, it makes me sick.

i have to put on my favourite knitted jumper and have a bowl of some of my delicious (organic) soup just to calm my nerves.
 
 
autopilot disengaged
14:06 / 06.09.01
you were sent expressly from hell to tick me off.

ok. fine. fair enough (though i never do McDs and he knows it). let's make me the sacrificial lamb.

i'm ready to stand up and say, yup, though i hate what they stand for, know they're manifestly exploitative and cause suffering the like of which i can barely comprehend in other, much poorer countries, a certain amount of my disposable income goes straight into the pockets of assorted corporations.

and i HATE admitting it. but, hell, someone may as well be the blank canvas (s'pose that should really be logo-ridden canvas, but you get the pic). so, c'mon, barbelith. tell me how i can save my sad, superficial soul. make me over - in reverse.

oh - and re:McDs - except for the occasional McFlurry on a hot day...but i'm only human, y'know.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:20 / 06.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Ellis:
I bought "No Logo" as I am sure quite a few people on the forum did, as well as a fair few other people, and it was well recieved by the press (or at least the quotes on the back would lead you to believe) and Naomi Klein certaily got a good few interviews out of it.


In point of fact, Naomi Klein reportedly turned down several interviews in favour of writing articles about other issues she felt should be brought to wider attention - eg, her excellent piece on the Zapatistas in the Observer. There seems to this misconception that she's a rampant self-publicist: the evidence I've encountered suggests precisely the opposite. She's had fame thrust upon her, as well as the unenviable role as a perceived leader of the <insert term of choice here> movement, but what she seems interested in doing is diverting that fame towards constructive/positive ends, through things like NoLogo.org, which covers all kinds of activism.

quote:But did it change anything?

I think there are two answers here: one is, of course it did, and the other is, on its own, no. It's a common tendancy - and arguably an unavoidable one for the time being - to see a book like No Logo as a sort of bible/manifesto which spawns a movement which in turn effects demonstrable changes. Whiel the second part may be true, the first doesn't, partly because a good deal of No Logo is concerned with documenting pre-existing forms of activism, brand-jamming, etc. This in turn has inspired many people to start doing it themselves.

quote:Did the people who bought and read the book stop buying McDonalds and Nike?...Did you?

Wouldn't like to speculate on anybody else, so... I can't remember when I stopped eating at MacDonalds. It was due to a lot of different factors, one of which it has to be said is living in London, where my options are substantial widened. My current trainers are Nikes with big holes in 'em, bought over a year ago and not replaced in part because I'm wrestling with where/whether to get some 'ethical' footwear. I'd say this was the result of becoming generally more 'politicised' about certain issues in the last year, and that No Logo played a part in this. So, as above: the book was and is part of a wider process of change...

(I'd also like to maybe raise the issue of how much one can remove oneself from complicity with corporate branding, and whether one should have to do so before taking part in activism, demonstrations, protests etc...)
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
14:22 / 06.09.01
My problem with changing my life to address the problems highlighted by No Logo (which I have never read) is that organic, locally-grown food is too expensive for people of no income. And No Logo's message is pointless if it is only going to change the way affluent people think, since they're more likely to be avoiding things made by the major corporations anyway. Individuality costs money and time, and though I have lots of the latter I have none of the former.
 
 
autopilot disengaged
14:28 / 06.09.01
do the more expensive/obscure labels have the same kind of shady ethics behind them as the mainstream names? are yr average (diffusion) designer togs, or skatewear made in the same kind of exploitative way?

anyone know?
 
 
adamswish
15:04 / 06.09.01
currently into the last third of the book and currently wrestling with these ideas (as well as the despression from finishing "no jobs" and seeing my unemployed arse described in there).
As to whether I would stop buying these things, well lets think:
Don't eat at MacDs (but do at Burger King)
Don't like Nike stuff (but have adidas and airwalk trainers)
It's been a while since I've been into a Starbucks (who are in the process of adding two more stores up here in Brum, and anyway thats to do with having no money)
Stay out of microsoft internet sites (but have windows on this machine, oh and use aol because they pay for the calls).

Then again is it possible to stop buying any of the products/brands mentioned in "no logo". The more ethical brands have to be searched out, and unless you live in a capital you're unlikely to find a store that stocks them.

Still an excellent, if slightly scary at times, read.
 
 
Fist Fun
07:36 / 18.09.01
quote:i'm ready to stand up and say, yup, though i hate what they stand for, know they're manifestly exploitative and cause suffering the like of which i can barely comprehend in other, much poorer countries, a certain amount of my disposable income goes straight into the pockets of assorted corporations.


...hmmm, I also earn money by working for assorted corporations...then give it back ( no matter how much I try to avoid it) ... this really has got to stop
 
 
Clavis
23:02 / 23.09.01
I have a copy of No Logo, but I haven't read it yet... not because I'm reluctant to "give up my brands", but just because so many other books are still in line in front of it. Shit, it's going to take me a while to finish Origin of Species. And that's partially because I keep dipping into other books, not to mention magazines and random websites LIKE THIS ONE!

As for the big four, I have a pair of walking shoes made by Brooks (I despise Nike and I encourage subvertising* whenever possible), I do occasionally but not regularly eat at McDonald's (if there were a Subway's in my neighborhood, I'd eat there all the time), a Starbuck's recently opened in my neighborhood and I NEVER go there (partially because I hate coffee, partially because I hate Starbucks) -- in fact, I consider vandalizing it every single time I walk past it, which is most days of my life, and I use Windows because... well, because I'm not a Mac user.

I have a friend who first pointed out the value of NOT buying things made in China, so I try to do that (it's actually pretty easy -- just check before you buy that cheap, $1 piece of crap). I wear jungle boots with no visible brand, if I buy pants with a brand name, I take a razor blade and cut the patch off of them (fuck free advertising for them)... in fact, I remove brands on the rare occasions when they're there in the first place.

Not to mention the first of the three R's: REDUCE. You won't have to buy as many of a given item, and you therefore won't have to worry about typically American (no idea about the UK) consumption, if you just hold on to what you've got. Which it sounds like some people in here do do. That's good.

On the other hand, I don't mind advertising a product if I'm really enthusiastic about it. For example, I have a Leatherman Wave (pocket knife/pliers thingie), and it rocks, and I love to show it off to people, and I ALWAYS wear it on my belt, so I don't mind that the belt sheath says "Leatherman WAVE" on it. It's in small letters, anyway.

You wouldn't believe how many zombies I see every day here in the Big Apple wearing the Swooshtika on some random article of clothing. I want to stop them and say, "Who the fuck told you Nike was cool?" but I don't. I'm convinced they wouldn't even understand the question. That is a little depressing.

Hey, where was I?


Clavis

*"Subvertising" is what I call making little stickers that say things like "Enjoy DRUGS" and "Engage in COITUS" and "Think ALIKE" and "Obey FASHION" and sticking them on ads where people can see them. It's my way of "translating" the true message of ads to those who may not realize what they're really being sold. It works great on the subway. (Er, that's the "tube" or "underground" or "choo-choo" or whatever you call it over there in England. )
 
 
Mystery Gypt
00:38 / 24.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Macavity:
My problem with changing my life to address the problems highlighted by No Logo (which I have never read) is that organic, locally-grown food is too expensive for people of no income. And No Logo's message is pointless if it is only going to change the way affluent people think, since they're more likely to be avoiding things made by the major corporations anyway.


the point of no logo is not "you will be a cooler and express more individualty if you don't wear nikes."

nor is the point "you must boycott cheap restaurants."

you can choose a million ways to respond to her exposures. the mounting movement against the WTO has a lot to do with no logo. that movement was gaining TONS of ground, though the wtc tragedy may actually set it back (its harder for americans to feel like protesting the WTO now, though the media is suddnely asking important questions that may bring it back around).

you can react to no logo by learning more, spreading information, etc. you can certainly eat for cheap without buying macdonalds, for christ sake. i havent eaten that crap in a decade and i hardly find myself in a constant state of disposable income.

obviously targetting wealthy people with the concepts of no logo is a smart thing to do. those are the people that work up the ladder to the policy decsions about how nike markets to ghetto kids and what the WTO forces countries to go through.
 
  
Add Your Reply