The Memetic Brand blog has moved over to a self-hosted wp version.
Please check us out at www.memeticbrand.com.
The eBook is available there too!
thank you,
Michael
The Memetic Brand blog has moved over to a self-hosted wp version.
Please check us out at www.memeticbrand.com.
The eBook is available there too!
thank you,
Michael
Check out this link to find a pretty good overview of traditional brand thinking when it comes to brand naming:
What makes a winning brand name? A name that requires no introduction, no explanation and very little advertising to give it clout.
Here is great new thinking about naming from Seth Godin:
A long time ago, the goal of a name was to capture the essence of your positioning. To deliver a USP, so you could establish supremacy in your space just with your name. International Business Machines and Shredded Wheat were good efforts at this approach.
It quickly became clear, though, that descriptive names were too generic, so the goal was to coin a defensible word that could acquire secondary meaning and that you could own for the ages. That’s why “Jet Blue” is a much better name than “Southwest” and why “Starbucks” is so much better than “Dunkin Donuts”.
“Naming companies” flourished, charging clients hundreds of thousands of dollars to coin made up words like Altria.
And here is a something that made me think – hey! a memetic brand name!
What do you think? Life ain’t easy for a boy named sue, but its that name that had memetic qualities and implications far beyond any traditional notion of market positioning.
UPDATE: Doug added a great comment below: “I think one person who has used his memetic name quite well is Om Malik, of GigaOm.com – the homonymic relation to ohm gives it a tech luster while keeping the sense of the personal perspective of a curator of information.”
Here is a quote from one of my forum discussions:
Michael, you state,”Of course relationships can be controlled by third parties and varying environmental contexts. Ask any pair of siblings who have been separated by the border between North and South Korea or the Berlin Wall. Ask Facebook, who at first did not let you in unless you were a student. Or Google, who knows what they are up to?”That’s true for “physical restraints/boundaries” but not “mental/motivational states” which are the essence of relationships.
So I agree. Perhaps “influence” is a better word to use than control when it comes to describing relationships. But I am not trying to be politically correct here. I am concerned that the potential exists for corporations to get so far ahead in managing and exploiting social networks that their “influence” will amount to “control” for many.
In any event, this exchange provoked some new thinking for me. Perhaps the “memetic brand” idea is worth exploring for a reason that I have not previously directly addressed?
Relationships are memetic.
Broadband powered individuals are the emerging dominant media platform.
If we ponder what makes relationships evolve or become extinct, which we all have a well developed instinct for, then we will have moved a great distance towards understanding how brands live or die beyond the broadcast era.
This TED talk by Kevin Kelly is not focused on brand, but it interesting how these ideas can be applied to technology, biology, culture and … brands.
As you watch or listen, please keep the comments section below open and jot down thoughts related to brands that pop up for you …