Live data from Hacker News

Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

arstechnica.com

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#21
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No great thing was ever accomplished without being passionate.Even the research field which is all about intellectualism needs you to be passionate about your ideas and ploughing away at them even though they are just untested hypotheses till it gets proved

Problem is, one needs to be passionate about the right things from the very beginning -- and, paradoxically, the only way to decide objectively which things are worth being passionate about is to start off being dispassionate about them.

But you do not need to be passionate about the right things from the beginning. For one thing, it is possible to move into a field late in life and make enormous advances. Fermat provided a brilliant example of this.

Of course, you could say Fermat was an outlier, but I suspect that anyone who is truly, deeply passionate about something is an outlier already. Most people go through their lives with little passion at all.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#22
post #19

I always thought this was an interesting example of Apple extremists being provoked by a hoax: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2004/02/62157 The hoaxer, identified only as "Andy," claimed he received a dual-processor G5 for Christmas. But preferring a Windows PC, he swapped out the insides of the $3,000 machine for the guts of a cheapo PC. The post included several digital photographs to prove the outrageous cl…

It's sometimes easy to check if someone is a corporate shill designed to discredit people or not. For example on Slashdot or HN, you can check their comment history. When you do that for Apple or Linux 'extremists' you always find them commenting normally in other discussions and even going in-depth into the ones that they're passionate about, i.e Apple or Linux discussions. If you think that those threats of violence were paid for by MS, I think you're being paranoid.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#24
post #19

I always thought this was an interesting example of Apple extremists being provoked by a hoax: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2004/02/62157 The hoaxer, identified only as "Andy," claimed he received a dual-processor G5 for Christmas. But preferring a Windows PC, he swapped out the insides of the $3,000 machine for the guts of a cheapo PC. The post included several digital photographs to prove the outrageous cl…

As an extreme example some believe that the Westboro Baptist Church is a group of these "reverse shills". I don't think I believe that myself though.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#25
I don't think this is such a bad finding.

Let's look at this from the perspective of the "brand." I make apps. What gets me pumped more than anything is an email in the morning from a customer who says they really enjoy my app and use it every day. Strong customer feedback and loyalty are what drive me to make better products.

If we were to take the opposite case, that customers saw brands as interchangeable cogs, then the only incentives out there for the people making products would be money, and that isn't what motivates creative people on a deep level.

A base of highly loyal customers creates, if you will, a very, very high bar of "social pressure" that makes it harder for managers to make decisions that screw them over.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#26
post #12
post #5

They use the word "fanbois" to sound pejorative, but isn't this a good thing? It basically means that people are passionate about your company and its products. It means you're relevant. It has always been like that with rivalries like Mac vs. PC, Nintendo vs. Sega, and now Android vs. iPhone/iPad.

The phrase "Apple fanbois" is disparaging against the fans themselves, but not against Apple. If your brand is successful enough to have fanboys, then your brand is successful and that's a good thing for you. The fanboys themselves are irrational, and deserving of some criticism about their irrationality, but that generally does not carry over to the brand itself.

Surely there are things a brand can do and comments a ceo can make that encourage or even nurture such behavior.

Harley Davidson certainly recognizes that.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#27
tl;dr: we make snap decisions about people because we have to; the world moves fast. therefore we want people to make the right snap decision about us, so we brand ourselves with bits and pieces of all the brands out there that we think convey us to the outside world. the line between brand and "me" get very blurry. when a person says "I hate brand X", because of that blurry line, they are saying/you are hearing: "I hate X% of you!"

---------------------------------

We have all seen this online at some point or another... Apple/Windows, iPhone/Android, Xbox/PS3, Vegetarian/Paleo, etc. and unfortunately I imagine a good number of us have experienced this in-person as well.

Bumping heads with someone fully ingrained in their brands is frustrating like no other, but why is it so pervasive? What is lacking in a person's life such that they carry around the brand of their favorite product with more pride then their own self-worth/intelligence/curiosity/love-of-life?

It seems like a global identity crisis.

Advertising tells us we HAVE to be different, we HAVE to be unique. God forbid I be exactly like my neighbor and we understand each other with a little bit of compassion... screw that, he's an idiot, and I am smart.

Then you see people so desperately clawing at uniqueness that things like branded clothing and devices just do not cut it anymore and you have explosive growth in body modifications[1]; tattoos to piercings in every other person I see at a coffee shop or walking down the street anymore.

I don't actually care what people do; if you need to feel different, go for it. What I do care about is the obsessive need for it in order to live your life. I feel like that is an artificial requirement that does nothing good for any of us.

Advertising has convinced us so whole heatedly that unless we are different (like everyone else) we won't be happy.

So it isn't much of a surprise that I compose myself, like a Frankenstein of identities, with a dash of iPhone, a sprinkle of back tattoos, a hint of ear-loop piercings, a flick of BMW and a smattering of D&C shoes to properly and completely define myself to the world. A visual finger print of "who I am".

All these brands are a giant grab-bag of fractions of identities that advertisers have attached to each one that we reach into and stick to ourselves in order to convey an ideal to the world.

I am relaxed, but smart, aware of my self-image, like nice things and care about the earth. Ok, so I have an iPhone 5, I wear trendy silicon valley swag, drive a BMW 5-series and shop at Whole Foods with my flip flops on.

It seems to me that this is the fallout from two things:

  1. Advertisers dividing and conquering us for a century.
  2. Pace of life being magnitudes times faster now.
I don't have time to get to know you anymore, so I make a snap decision on who you are, what you believe in and how you live by looking at how you label yourself.

Nice suit, nice car, big house, practice law and live in Dallas? Then I guess you are a Republican, don't care about the earth, hate social programs and only care about yourself and your family.

See what conclusions I jumped to?

Now when I see you cutting your hedge and getting clippings on my lawn, I already hate you and decided you only care about yourself, so my opening sentence to you is "Hey Jerkface, come rake this up!"

Nevermind the fact that even if I lived next to you for 10 years, I might never get to know you anyway.

I don't know that any of this is "wrong" or "bad", it just is what it is. We jump to snap decisions because we don't have the time NOT to. Because we jump to snap decisions we want to make sure we brand ourselves in the proper way to convey the RIGHT snap decision.

So the line between "me" and "my brands" are blurring really badly. If I identify myself with the brands I chose, to some extent those brands ARE me.

If you hate those brands, then you hate me... and I hate you.

Which is unfortunate.

[1] http://images.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&sourc...

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, one needs to be passionate about the right things from the very beginning -- and, paradoxically, the only way to decide objectively which things are worth being passionate about is to start off being dispassionate about them.

But you do not need to be passionate about the right things from the beginning. For one thing, it is possible to move into a field late in life and make enormous advances. Fermat provided a brilliant example of this. Of course, you could say Fermat was an outlier, but I suspect that anyone who is truly, deeply passionate about something is an outlier already. Most people go through their lives with little passion at…

I was passionate about zoology during some of the formative years of my life.

I realized later that unless I become the next Darwin, I will never be happy with my career choice because I will be doomed to working for a large part of my life for people less intelligent than myself and that I will not grow as a person because of that.

Passion is good unless we lose control of it.

Re: Fanbois treat criticism of favorite brands as threat to self-image

#30
post #27

tl;dr: we make snap decisions about people because we have to; the world moves fast. therefore we want people to make the right snap decision about us, so we brand ourselves with bits and pieces of all the brands out there that we think convey us to the outside world. the line between brand and "me" get very blurry. when a person says "I hate brand X", because of that blurry line, they are saying/you are hearing: "I…

I was taught at a young age not to, "judge a book by its cover," and after 30+ years of living, that seems like sound advice. I've met some amazing homeless people, and really inspiring wealthy folks. Usually, the people that I've met with commercial brand allegiance have been less interesting, but most are still nice.

If one is making a decision that might affect their life/ livelihood directly, sure, it is prudent to not hand over trust to an entity with whom you are unfamiliar. Other than that, I don't judge my neighbors by their brand choice.

Post reply on HN