November 14, 2003

Baby Brands?

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | US babies get global brand names

Well, I've often thought that the US was the new Roman Empire (as I believe Eddy Izzard commented) and I think this article proves it. While marketeers try to focus a brand so that it conveys a specific image, generally I think parents probably do this as well, however generally they don't converge on the same image or name. I mean L'Oreal?

I won't admit to being immune to trends (apparently in the UK there is a trend for Celtic names and my children have Celtic names - I didn't know that there was a trend...) however it comes to something when people want to name their children after actual product brands? Then again maybe the fact that people name their children after famous people is just the same?

Does the fact that a culture causes people to aspire to name children after affluent positioned brands mean that it has gone beyond the pale? I've always considered names important. While names are not all that defines a person, to me names are very important, they say who I am, they are who you are, your brand, to paraphrase Tom Peters.

If a culture encourages you to name children after a brand of hair products, what does that say about you and what does that do to your children? Isn't there a fundamental disconnect with their very humanity? Money, the pursuit of affluence is more important than anythng else. Something is very wrong.

Posted by Paul Goodison at November 14, 2003 10:27 PM | TrackBack

Post a comment

Remember personal info?