Skip to main content

What the Michael Brown shooting is really about

The Michael Brown case is as much about a narrative being built and reinforced in the public space as it is about a shooting. A certain section of the black community in America, along with their race-hustler leaders, and amply aided by a race-hustling media build and reinforce the 'poor black victim' narrative by seizing at opportunities like this tragic one.

The reason why they do it is 'cos it suits them perfectly well. It ensures their 'victim identity' stays intact, which in turn brings with it social benefits. Such social handouts then ensure they can bypass the toils that come with 'earning wealth' through legitimate means. 'Big Mike' Brown (if the video indeed features him) wasn't spending his earned money to buy stuff at a store. He was robbing it!

Why rob? Ask the liberals and they will present 'victimization' as why young black males turn to usurping other people's hard earned wealth through the use of force (watch the video and you'll know what I mean). Big Mike wasn't doing anything of his free will, they will say. His hand was forced, they will say. Push the narrative further, and they'll even say, what's wrong with stealing? If you say it is wrong to steal, they will talk about how their ancestors were wronged.

You see, the narrative must go on. It suits them perfectly well. It suits race hustlers like Jesse Jackson just fine. So it does for liberal lame-stream media like CNN whose core audiences are narrative-pushers .

What a pity. Disgusting too.

Now to the business of Marketing. Lifestyle consumption that consumers engage in is so a constructed narrative leads to a desired identity in the public space. Brand patronage is so other people see and make impressions. I do the luxury brands so I can have you see me as 'sophisticated'. I slap on the torn jeans so you spot the 'rebel' in me, and so on.

The vandalism and protest that Ferguson endured has less to do with a community's grief over a shooting. Its simply their way of pushing a narrative that suits them. 


Popular posts from this blog

Situational Involvement of Consumers

There are two types of involvement that consumers have with products and services, Situational and Enduring. Situational involvement as the term suggests, occurs only in specificsituations whereas Enduring involvement is continuous and is more permanent in nature.

Decisions to buy umbrellas in India are driven by the onset of Indian monsoon. Monsoon rains arrived in India over the South Andaman Sea on May 10 and over the Kerala coast on May 28, three days ahead of schedule. But then, after a few days of rain, South India is witnessing a spate of dry weather. Temperatures are soaring in the north of India. The Umbrella companies in the state of Kerala are wishing for the skies to open up. So is the farming community and manufacturers of rural consumer products whose product sales depend totally on the farming community. The Met. department has deemed this dry spell as 'not unusual'.

India's monsoon rains have been static over the southern coast since last Tuesday because of a…

Prior Hypothesis Bias

Prior Hypothesis bias refers to the fact that decision makers who have strong prior beliefs about the relationship between two variables tend to make decisions on the basis of those beliefs, even when presented with the evidence that their beliefs are wrong. Moreover, they tend to use and seek information that is consistent with their prior beliefs, while ignoring information that contradicts these beliefs.

From a strategic perspective, a CEO who has a strong prior belief that a certain strategy makes sense might continue to pursue that strategy, despite evidence that it is inappropriate or failing.

Ref : Strategic Management : An Integrated Approach, 6e, Charles W L Hill, Gareth R Jones

Consumer Spending

Carpe Diem Blog: From Visual Economics, a graphical representation appears above (click to enlarge) of Consumer Expenditures in 2007, using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note that total spending on food ($6,133), clothing ($1,881) and housing ($16,920) represented 50% of consumer expenditures and 30% of income before taxes in 2007. In 1997 by comparison, 51.1% of consumer expenditures were spent on food, clothing and housing, and 44.6% of income before taxes was spent on food, clothing and housing (data here).