More Than Words, Brand Destruction in the Online Sphere

The focus of this paper is brand destruction, however in a slightly different sense than the traditional marketing literature depicts it. The concept of brand destruction basically tends to be discussed either (1) as an accidental, counter-productive event in a campaign which leads to the ruining of the brand, or (2) an intentional act by competitors in the market, which results the same breakdown mentioned above. As this paper shows, there are other ways to consider as well, when speaking about brand destruction. An often overlooked type of brand destruction is a rather new phenomenon: destroying the brand by customers or business partners. The adequate scene for this case is the internet itself, especially different social media platforms, e. g. Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram, etc. Also popular weblogs can play an important role in brand destruction made by customers or business partners (general cases related to social media are depicted in Lipsman – Mud – Rich – Bruich, 2012). This paper presents a couple of cases in the online field and focuses basically on online communicative activities, in which a brand’s negative properties come to discussion. Both Hungarian and foreign examples are easy to find and they all demonstrate the growing power of consumers. This observation led marketing experts to start talking about the ‘smooth seizure of power by consumers’. Whilst the critic of this concept is considered to be relevant, this paper describes the elements and methods of the ‘seizure’ – from an online social point of view. The key of handling brand destruction cases efficiently lies in the role of social media users. They are not only consumers, but the opportunity for producing online contents is in their hands as well – this fact results in the idea of ‘prosumers’. Thus customers on social media platforms must be handled as a ‘critical mass’: as civic warriors with strong weapons in their armoury. No companies are allowed to feel safe, as the slightest error may well be punished by the crowd.

Járadékteremtés és az áldemokráciák = Rent creation and pseudo-democracies

Tanulmányunkban egy olyan rendszerrel foglalkozunk, amely köztes helyet foglal el a demokrácia és az autokrácia között, mindkettő jegyeit magán viseli, és amelyet ezért áldemokráciának nevezünk. A rendszer működési sajátosságait a járadékok szemszögéből vizsgáljuk, és arra keressük a választ, hogy demokratikus országokban hogyan képes egy párt tartósan domináns pozícióban maradni. Modellünk segítségével összekapcsoljuk a járadékteremtést a szavazatok maximalizálásának céljával, és bemutatjuk, miért jelenthet racionális döntést a hatalmon lévők számára a rövid távú optimumon túlmutató járadékteremtés is. A modell rávilágít arra, hogy a többletjáradékok segítségével a kormányzat - klientúrája megerősítése, a demokratikus rendszer határainak feszegetése, valamint az ellenzék visszaszorítása révén - hosszú távú előnyökre tehet szert, áldemokráciát hozva létre. Történelmi példák jól mutatják, hogy a rendszer bukását végül általában a gyengébb gazdasági teljesítmény és a korrupció széles körűvé válása kényszeríti ki. _____ The paper focuses on a specific political system lying between democracy and autocracy, which has similarities to both. Called here a pseudo-democracy, it is examined from the point of view of rents. The paper enquires how a democracy can allow a single party to dominate the political landscape for a long period. The author constructs a model to link rent creation to vote maximization, arguing that it can be rational for incumbents to increase rents beyond the short-term optimum. The model also reveals that surplus rents may offer long-term gains to an elite by strengthening its clientčle, challenging the systemic political framework and holding back the opposition. Historical examples show that the end-result of a pseudo-democratic system will usually be to weaken economic performance and increase corruption.