I got the Monies

Having said goodbye to the World Cup and Wimbledon, a curious concoction of impending exam results and blistering sunshine lie in wait in the months of July and August. In the build-up to all the sporting action this summer, companies bombarded our TV screens with adverts intended to entice us to purchase their product. What’s interesting to note is there is something far more sinister behind the scenes of these major corporations, and you simply cannot judge them on their branding and marketing alone. Believe it or not, the only thing these companies are out for is your money.

Those who live in the UK will fondly remember that at the end of last year, a giant battle ensued between two very different stars. In the blue corner, you had Joe McElderry, a teenage singing sensation who shrugged off the rest of the competition to win the X-Factor. In the red corner, you had Rage Against The Machine, a popular American rock-band renowned as much for its fierce music as it was for its views on corporate America. Through the power of social media, Rage Against The Machine managed to get their single “Killing in the Name”, a profanity-laden song from 1992 to Christmas Number 1, in the process stopping the Simon Cowell-backed Joe McElderry from reaching Number 1. While everyone saw this as a victory for the anti-establishment movement, it turns out that Sony Music owns both Sony BMG (Joe McElderry’s label) and Epic Records (Rage Against the Machine’s label) and so Sony Music was laughing all the way to the bank.

By creating brands, corporations can sell more items to more people. In the process, these different brands sell specific products to specific demographics of people who believe in specific values. All the while, the corporations are just after the money and not too bothered what these brands sell. For example, I was disappointed to find out that National Geographic Channel and Fox News are both owned by the Fox Cable Networks. One stands for the beauty and wonder of the natural world, and the other one is Fox News. Slimfast, which promotes weight-loss and healthy living are owned by Unilever who also are behind twelve different ice-cream brands including Klondike, Walls, and Ben and Jerry’s. Speaking of Ben and Jerry’s, aren’t they supposed to be the hippy independent ice-cream seller? Doesn’t being owned by a corporation like Unilever totally defeat the purpose of Ben and Jerry’s itself?

Dove had a fantastic marketing campaign involving putting up real women, as opposed to super-slim models, and showcasing the ordinary woman as beautiful no matter what their size. At the same time you then have Lynx, a company that prides itself in using provocative images and sexualised campaigns to sell their manly products. Guess what, both are owned by Unilever. Two companies with two completely separate ideals owned by the same corporation. Other examples include Nuts magazine, a UK softcore porn mag, and the Hannah Barbara cartoon franchise are both owned by Time Warner. MTV also have a similar design owning both Nickelodeon and Spike TV. One is aimed at tweenagers, the other at horny men.

It all boils down to this. Corporations have only one goal, one philosophy. Make more money, by any means necessary. Whether that means going down an ethically sound route or not, these megalomaniacs do not have a conscience. So the next time, you buy something, be wary of the fact that all they want is your dosh.

“Corporate social responsibility is a hard-edged business decision. Not because it is a nice thing to do or because people are forcing us to do it… because it is good for our business” – Niall Fitzerald, Former CEO, Unilever

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitthis
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Live
  • PDF
  • Google Bookmarks
Tagged as:

2 Comments

  1. A corporation’s goal and mission is to serve their stakeholders first and foremost. However, some companies that get bought out by conglomerates don’t necessarily change due to corporate buy-out. Many still keep their fundamental values intact. For example, even though Ben & Jerry’s was purchased by Unilever, they still keep their principles that the two founders had instilled in the company to this day. Another example is Zappos, which was recently purchased by Amazon. One year later and the company is still very profitable, admired, and stuck firmly to their founding ideologies. Only now a dominant player in the ecommerce industry backs them.

    Yes, greed does play a role in this but coming from a business perspective, sustaining a company and having it bought by a conglomerate is something on most entrepreneurs long-term goal list. Being purchased helps that company stay financially backed as well as allows them to dive into investor money for growth.

    I understand your argument about the ethical part and it seems like a few major conglomerates own the brands we buy and are only hungry for money. But, that could also be a good thing for entrepreneurs looking to enter a market or start their own and become noticed.

  2. I agree with Komail, B&J and Zappos are examples of how a company with values can be part of a soulless corporation and still maintain those values. Another one is Body Shop – well known for their ethical stance – they were sold to L’oreal and not only kept their ethics but according to ex-owner Anita Roddick, also had a positive effect on L’oreal – changing it from the inside

Leave a comment!