Tattoos and the Commodification of Self

It is perhaps ironic that we just finished a class discussion on tattoos as a means to “mark” one’s identity both physically and metaphorically. This discussion took place in the broader discussion regarding fashion and identity. Tattooing is an art form. Tattooing is a fashion statement. Getting a tattoo is a significant act imbued with all sorts of meaning. It’s not cheap either. I brought up a point that I think was difficult at that time to digest: the idea that young people mark their bodies because they do not feel they are likely to leave a mark on this world. The tattoo is permanently yours, no one can take it away from you, and it is something you’ll likely die with (although we acknowledge the possibility of laser removal). When I said that young people feel they will not likely make a mark on this world, one student was able to clarify better than I what this might mean: she referred to a friend at a large university who was known only by his student number. Yes, we live with growing anonymity in this postmodern world where identity is shape shifting on what seems a constant basis: who I am in class is not who I am at my internship, etc. etc.

Tattooing is a way of temporarily fixing identity, of grounding it in something that is physical – you can look at it, although often times we hide tattoos from others, and it is meaningful; quite meaningful we learned as people get tattoos to mark moments in time (travel abroad), as a statement of belief, in memory of someone lost, among other reasons. Of course, once you have one tattoo, you have to get another one, because that is the only way one can create “difference” and in that individuality. The more anonymity grips us, the more we grope for difference. The New York Times (2/18/09) reports on the phenomenon of renting one’s body as a commercial billboard, in this case with a temporary henna tattoo advertising Air New Zealand. This strikes me as interesting, first because I’ve read about this in the past. Indeed a few years ago I read of a woman who offered to rent her bulging pregnant belly to an advertiser. And another young man offered to rent his forehead for a commercial message.

This commodification of the body seems to me to represent the final blow to the tattoo trend, LA Ink notwithstanding. Here I mean to reflect another point that came out of our discussion: that tattooing isn’t as popular with Gen Y as it was with members of Gen X. Trends are like that, eventually they all get flushed through the system. But that doesn’t mean that this current generation of teens and young adults has found an antidote for social instability, of which I think the recent tattoo trend is emblematic. Rather, there may be greater significance to renting out one’s body to an advertiser: it may mean that the commodified body is one that is totally devoid of personal meaning. It may be the ultimate statement of anonymity. To give one’s self up to a corporation renders the body meaningless (George Orwell, where are you when we need you!). When I think of this state of affairs it saddens me until I realize that culture is dynamic, and another trend will ultimately replace this one. What the next generation of youngsters will move on to is anybody’s guess. But how they will deal with a society that increasingly treats them as a number and not a person is another matter entirely.

Pre-gaming the Super Bowl Ads

You know what the term pre-gaming refers to, but that's not how I'm using it in this blog post, well, not exactly. I'm using the term pre-gaming in the sense that I believe advertisers are metaphorically trying to make you "drunk" with their ads before the ads air during the upcoming Super Bowl. How are they doing this? In recent years, advertisers have learned to become more efficient with their advertising expenditures. After all, does anyone really think $3 million for a 30 second ad is worth it? Perhaps if you calculate the value based on CPM it may constitute an effective "reach" if the audience is large enough. But exposure does not equal effectiveness, as consumers don't necessarily pay close attention to television advertising, even the Super Bowl ads. My favorite example of this phenomenon relates to the results of the day-after recall surveys that oftentimes indicate that consumers mistake a brand like Tostitos for Doritos, even though it is the latter that is paying the big bucks for the Super Bowl ad. So, how do advertisers defend against this? Extending the relationship beyond exposure to the 30 second TV commercial is one way of engaging the consumer in an experience that I'm calling pre-gaming. The pre-gaming to which I refer to involves multiple opportunities for consumers to deepen their experience with a brand, product or service. Doritos stands out for its consumer generated advertising (CGA) effort. But other corporations, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal, are engaging in this tactic: Pedigree dog food, E*Trade, Cars.com, Pepsi's SoBe, and CareerBuilder.com, among others. Opportunities abound this year to engage with the brand on perhaps a deeper level and in a more sustained way.

I attempt to do similar things in my courses: provide experiences that extend our learning community beyond the classroom. Think about the numerous ways we "engage" this semester on Netvibes the course aggregator, the Wetpaint Wiki, and the blog sites. I know students are often distracted during class, this is particularly so when we convene in a computer lab where, instead of focusing on the work at hand, students send email, text-message, and of course, check out their Facebook page. Did I mention day-dreaming? For me, utilizing social software is an attempt--my experiment--to engage students beyond the classroom (the classroom is s-o-o-o 20th Century). Learning through contextual experiences, and participating in simulations are alternative ways to create and maintain a learning community. You'll let me know how well this works in our class by the end of the semester.

The Super Bowl extravaganza takes place in a much shorter time frame, so the intensity and forcefulness of the engagement must be up to the task. I've got a little more time. Advertisers want you to engage with their brand, knowing that 30 seconds isn't enough time to do so. Water-cooler talk that takes place the day after the game (post-gaming) helpful in extending the experience of the brand, but interactive websites, games, contests and other on-line activities are more immersive. In this way education and advertising have something in common: we both want you to pay attention, engage deeply with our content, and learn something as a result of the experience. I hope what I'm doing appeals to a higher cause; marketers just want you to buy a six-pack.

Pre-gaming is a way for consumers to deeply engage with brands, products and services through their interactions on web sites and through social media. For those of you who are considering imbibing alcohol prior to the Super Bowl, I offer this alternative. Pre-game with the brands and all the engaging activities marketers have to offer. Fat chance.