We've watched an episode of 'The Apprentice' in which contestants work to win a position at Donald Trump's company. We've also discussed briefly how you can take a look at organisations as culture and as communities and how strategies are derived from an organisation culture. Please sketch Donald Trump's perspective on 'doing business'. That is, give a short history on what kind of company's Trump owns (or used to own), what his business approach is, how his organisation is structured as a culture and community and how would you relate his way to the 'American way' and an 'European way'.

Sadly I had to miss session/lecture 4, so I didn't have the chance to see the episode of 'The Apprentice'. And I don't know what was treated in class, but here's my take on Donald Trump. I found this quote on the internet about "the apprentice" (and that probably is Trump's perspective): Wordlessly, it conveys the sense that wealth is good, achievement is good, ambition matters, success is attainable--that enjoying life on this earth is good. It is a concretization of "The American Dream." [http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3634]. Trump owns hotels and casino's, Miss Universe, Trump Golf and a real estate company. After turning real estate into goldmines, he got rich, then lost a lot of money, but recuperated and became one of the wealthiest men alive. His company and point of view is all about success, but Trump is a very much loved person as well. He uses his name as if it's a brand, even having towers named after him in Seoul. Trump is a culture for the rich and the famous; beauty pageants, casino's, golf courses and housing. As Trump puts it, his universive is ever-expanding, it's all about wanting more. That would relate to the 'American Way', or perhaps the American Dream of getting everything you desire. The 'European Way' may be a little less concerned about always wanting more and more and the future, instead being grateful for what you have achieved and more concerned with the present.
The assigned post for me to respond to:

How hard it is not to come up with analytical, but with critical questions! hmm... maybe I should become more critical... :)

Küng-Shankleman, L. (2000) What is Organisation Culture? In: Küng-Shankleman, L. (2000) Inside the BBC and CNN: Managing Media Organizations (London: Routledge)

Q: When envirionments develop or change, organizations need to apply new strategies to the new situation. As globalisation develops more and more, do strategies need to become more global?
A: When you look at the major companies, I think they already have been applying worldwide strategies in the last few decades. Companies like Coca Cola, Nike and Disney have been aiming at worldwide markets. But I can imagine that they use different strategies in different countries/cultures. If we'll ever reach such a thing as a "Global Village", only one strategy may already be sufficient. When looking at the blockbuster film market, it is noticable that film companies are trying to make their films as universal as possible, to reach as much worldcitizens as possible, knowing that revenues will be much higher when audiences in Europe and Asia will appreciate your film too. So when a global culture is forming, a more universal approach/strategy is necessary when you want to reach a broad audience.

De Mooij, M. (1998) Dimensions of Culture. In: De Mooij, M. (1998) Global Marketing and Advertising (London: Sage)

Q: De Mooij uses 'dimensions of culture' to classify cultures. Is that a usuable concept to define a culture?
A: As De Mooij explains, it is a comprehensive way to differentiate one culture from another. It helps to label differences and similarities in different cultures. However, it is a very broad way to define a culture. Often there are shifts in cultural values from one generation to the next, or one part of the country to an other part. So I don't think that you can market a product 'for the Dutch' or 'for the Japanese'. Of course you will be a bit successful, as you are reaching a big audience. But if you specify your target audience, I think advertising and marketing can be more to the point and therefore possibly more rewarding.

Final Paper Concept for Participatory Culture

Dylan Tonk – 0011266

 

“You will discover a life filled with adventure and meet other smart, motivated people like you. Because the strength of the U.S. Army doesn't only lie in numbers, it lies in you, An Army of One.”

 

Online Marketing Strategies: Branding an Army

 

My initial idea for my final paper was to analyse the computergame America’s Army (http://www.americasarmy.com), an online First Person Shooter-game developed by the U.S. Army to recruit new soldiers. The game is very popular and has over two million registered players, all around the world. In terms of ideology and hegemony it is interesting to see how the American standard is emphasized in the game and how players can/will adopt this view by playing the game. Not only is the game used to train/recruit new soldiers, it is also a way to spread American ideology[1].

 

However, the game is only one aspect of the marketing strategy the U.S. Army uses to attract an audience. Their website ‘http://www.goarmy.com’ is cleverly designed and it looks like the army is some kind of brand, complete with a logo, slogans and advertising techniques. I want to analyse how the U.S. Army uses the internet to market itself, to promote its image and the implications thereof.

 

I have formulated the following question, which will be the central focus of my research:

 

How does the U.S. Army make use of the possibilities of the internet in terms of promotion, marketing and the spreading of ideology?

 

I hope to come to an answer to this question at the end of my paper. In the chapters I will define, analyse and explain the terms I use in my central question. I have divided my final paper in five chapters, each of which will have a subquestion.

 

1. Online Marketing

Subquestion: what new ways of marketing has the internet got to offer?

In this chapter I will try to define online marketing and give an overview of existing techniques and strategies. Basically it is about selling products, and the different ways how the internet can be used to do such a thing.

 

2. Branding

Subquestion: what are brands and how do they function in marketing?

In the second chapter I want to theorize brands. How they are built and what implications they have. There are different sorts/types of brands and different ways to use them. How do advertising, brands, producers and consumers relate?

 

3. The U.S army and marketing

Subquestion: What is the internet marketing approach of the U.S. Army?

In this case study of how the U.S. Army puts the internet to use for promotion, numbers and statistics can give a clear summary of the effects of their approach. What is the target audience of the army and what do they do to reach them?

 

4. Goarmy.com

Subquestion: What levels of participation are being offered on the Goarmy.com website?

In this chapter I want to provide an analysis of the website Goarmy.com, the promotional website of the U.S. Army. I also want to look at how it is designed and what visitors can do on the website.

 

5. America’s Army

Subquestion: Did the game America’s Army reach the goal for which it was made?

How does the U.S. Army use the game America’s Army for promotion and recruiting. Why was it developed and what are its effects and implications?

 

At the end of each chapter I hope to answer the subquestions. I can use those answers to answer my central question in the conclusion.

 

Literature/sources:

 

Internet:

http://www.goarmy.com

http://www.americasarmy.com

 

Articles:

Küng-Shankleman, L., What is Organisation Culture? (2000), “Inside the BBC and CNN: Managing Media Organizations” (London: Routledge)

 

Mooij, M. de, Dimensions of Culture (1998) “Global Marketing and Advertising” (London: Sage)

 

Tybout, A.M. & G.S. Carpenter, Creating and Managing Brands (2001), in: D. Iacobucci “Kellogg on marketing” (New York: John Wiley & sons, Inc.)

 

Books:

Gay, P. du & M. Pryke, Cultural Economy (2002)

Jenkins (2002) writes on p. 1
"If the current media environment makes visible the once invisible work of media spectatorship, it is wrong to assume that we are somehow being liberated through improved media technologies." What is your opinion about this statement? Please use a maximum of 250 words.

 

I think that spectators are indeed becoming more and more visible, but it’s a little farfetched to say that audiences are being liberated. I for one do not feel that I am ‘liberated’, even though I have been a spectator for let’s say twenty years. When I was younger, I was really active as a viewer/user/spectator, writing fan fiction for films and TV, making websites for TV shows and more of that. But now I’m older I don’t have the time anymore to be that active with texts. So I for one have become more passive as an audience. But I don’t know if that goes for the lion’s share of the audience. Of course it’s true that audiences today have a greater influence in what is shown on TV or in the cinema than people used to have in the beginning of film and TV. Media technologies certainly played a big part in making audiences become active and aware of the new possibilities. But I wouldn’t go as far as to say that we are being liberated. I would rather say we’re being acknowledged and more respected than we used to.

 

The assigned post for me to respond to:

 

“Well, without elaborating (because this is a post to check the system) I would argue that this is not the case. The improved media technologies are responsable for the co-producing audience we discussed during the previous class. They allow better manipulation, duplication, distribution, connectivity etc. that have helped form our "Participatory Culture". I think there is some liberation in that...”

 

I think there is some truth in this post. It basically says that it is liberating to participate. So by being creative with offered texts, you can develop your own ideas and be constructive with something that someone else started. I think ‘liberating’ or ‘being liberated’ is a difficult term to use in this context. I points to suppression and I think that in the days of the hypodermic needle theory that was partly true, as it was believed that everyone took the message of the text for granted. You could say that you were being suppressed by the dominant ideology of the text. Nowadays, in participatory culture, you can give your own meaning to texts and do with it what you want. So in that way you have been liberated. But that all depends on if you believe that there ever was such a thing as the hypodermic needle theory...

Jenkins, H. (2002) Interactive Audiences? The 'Collective Intelligence' of Media Fans. In: Harries, D. (2002) The New Media Book (London: BFI)

Q: How does collective intelligence work in a community?
A: Fans know a lot about the object of their affection, but single fans cannot know everything. A community can fill in the blanks, as everyone knows a little. All those bits of information combined form the collective intelligence of a community. So how does collective intelligence work? The internet, and especially a forum is a great way of sharing information. Different topics are meant for people to share thoughts and knowledge. Questions can be posed and answers will be posted by fans who know them. It is very dynamic, as new information can be added all the time, and fans exchange as much information as possible. So you can say that collective intelligence is the term for all the knowledge of all the users/fans combined. But it only works if fans are willing to exchange their knowledge.

Marshall, D. (2002) The New Intertextual Commodity. In: Harries, D. (2002) The New Media Book (London BFI)

Q: How is technology used in the shift from information to experience?
A: Technology (and especially computer technology) can very easily be used to offer consumers a different way of earning knowledge. In the early days of computers, they were mainly used for professional purposes (calculating, textprocessing etc.), but later the computerindustry began developing computers for games (consoles). Game computers were a hit and attracted a vast audience. Personal Computers (PC's) were also being put to use for entertainment, first mainly for simple games. As the internet developed, a shift occurred there as well, from being more informative (websites with information) to becoming very interactive (online games, communities etc.). You can even say that because of the new technology the shift from information to experience was accelerated. So instead of the question posed above, a much more interesting question might be: was technology, and specifically computertechnology, responsible for the shift from information to experience? 

For my nota I am going to use the online game 'America's Army'. I occasionally played the game at friend of mine's. It's a first person shooter, just like a game like Doom or Counterstrike. As pointed out in the first lecture, the game has been developed by the Pentagon as a means to recrute new soldiers for the US army. That's why I think it's a interesting game to analyse for my nota. I hope to find some theories I can use, and I noticed that we're going to do a case on America's Army in the 6th course. I hope that provides me with some ideas how to elaborate on the subject.

H. Vogel (2001) Entertainment industry economics - a guide for financial analysis (Cambridge university press, 5th ed.). Chapter 1: Economic perspectives

Q: In the article it is explained that leisure is commonly defined as 'time not spent at work', when you are free of compulsion and obligation. Part of leisure time is the free time, which is time not spent at work AND time not spent on eating and sleeping. The part of the free time spent on recreation' is the part that is spent on emotional and physical well-being (e.g. sports, studying etc.). Entertainment is the part of recreation which, according to the article 'produces a pleasurable and satisfying experience'. So if 'entertainment' is such a small segment of spending time, why is it that the entertainment industry is booming business?
A: I think that in recent times, people have become more interested and maybe even obsessed with entertainment. People are using more and more of their recreational time for entertainment instead of using it for sports or study. If you look at TV for instance, most programs are entertainment. So TV is losing its function of being educational, but is turning into something only diverting. The entertainment industry is embracing this shift, and with technological progress, more possibilities are being offered to be entertained. And of course it's only logical that people would want to be entertained, because of the 'pleasurable and satisfying experience' it offers. But to what extent is this really true? Maybe it's only because the entertainment industry is promoting her products in such a way that it is turning into a hype to be entertained. If so, the industry is succeeding very well in this strategy, that's why so much money is being made (and spent) in the entertainmend industry.

E. Castronova (2003) On virtual economics

Q: Will the virtual economy become more interesting and attractive for companies to invest in than the real economy?

I will post the critical Q&A for last week here today...

I. Hutchby (2001) Conversation and technology - from the telephone to the internet (Polity Press). Chapter 2: The communicative affordances of technological artefacts.

Q: How do interpretation and affordance differ?
A: An interpretation is the personal meaning you give to an artefact. A meaning is something mental and elusive. An affordance on the other hand is not elusive. It is something you can do with an artefact. The artefact has certain qualities and properties and you can choose how to use it. If the interpretation of let's say a wedding ring is 'everlasting love', the affordance of it can be to put it around your finger and never take it off. The characteristics of the ring make it possible to put it on, it's tangible (in contrast to the meaning the ring bears).

The difference between interpretation and affordance lies in what you do with the artefact: use the artefact in a way it is offering you (use it in a pre-given way: inside out, you pull something out that was already in there) or give meaning to it (you decide how to interpret the artefact: outside in, you put something in there that wasn't there before). Interpretation and affordance are equal in restrictions of use. There are only so many interpretations/affordances an artefact can have. You can decide which one interpretation and wich one affordance you want to choose.

M. Dodge & R. Kitchin (2001) Mapping cyberspace (London: Routledge). Chapter 2: Geographies of the information society.

Q: Sardar argues that cyberspace fosters an American view of the world. The writers of this chapter embrace Sardar's view, but I'm wondering how long this assumption will hold. How long will globalisation mean Americanisation?
A: Research has pointed out that in a few years, Chinese will be the dominating language on the internet, and that Asians are going to take over the World Wide Web. Will there be two 'internets' then? One for western users and one for eastern users? Or have eastern users already adapted to American standards and will follow the western model? I think that eastern presence on the internet will become more and more evident; but not that that's a bad thing. On the contrary. If the internet is a tool to become a global village, this will only be a step in the right direction.

Technologically, Asia is making giant steps, and this also goes for the Asian economy. In a few years (or earlier) Asia will be a force to be reckoned with worldwide and America will have to fight to keep it's privileged position of ruler of the internet. Globalisation will no longer mean Americanisation and maybe Chinese brands will have the same kind of attraction as American brands have nowadays. Economists are already saying that the best thing you can do to prepare yourself for the future is to learn Chinese :)

OK I'm finally going to start this weblog... sorry for the delay. I think I'm already some articles behind... I hope to catch up with them later. In my next entry the assignments for this week (which were due today at 11PM).