Oscar and the Incredible Lightness of Branding

Branding is so commonplace that it can be difficult to separate the art from the corporate backer.

When Joan Rivers first began asking red carpet Oscar nominees “Who are you wearing?” more than a decade ago, she neatly articulated the commoditization of celebrity. Since then, celebrity endorsements have morphed into global brands.

In an age where we spend more hours per day consuming media than having direct human contact, branding has become a part of the collective consciousness. We are bombarded continuously with celebrity brands online, on TV, in magazines and newspapers, on billboards, in buses, subways, stores, supermarkets, and even elevators, and it shows no sign of abating.

It is therefore refreshing to see Canadian actress and director Sarah Polley withdrawing her name in protest from a film produced for Oscar night. Originally, she understood the film would create awareness about the Heart and Stroke Foundation and only learned afterward that the film was also promoting Becel margarine. As she indicated in a subsequent interview: “I have never actively promoted any corporate brand, and cannot do so now.”

Polley’s decision comes at a time when recession and globalization have created fierce competition that makes branding the cost of doing business. Polley’s courageous decision draws a small but significant line in the sand against the relentless juggernaut of the celebrity brand.

While the Oscars may serve as the epicentre of corporate branding, its impact is global, including north of the border where Olympic sports stars, hockey heroes, and other celebrities know branding is their key to sustaining fame and fortune.

Today, everything has become a brand. In Canada, after years of government cutbacks, we have witnessed the rebranding of the CBC from a public institution into a ratings-driven light entertainment network, and watched the Royal Ontario Museum become “people soft,” with the hosting of a Vanity Fair retrospective and other featherweight collections. The message for small, not-for-profit arts groups and working artists is clear: become a brand and attract corporate support to generate the funding formerly provided by government, or perish.

While established, successful artists like Polley have the means and resources to take a stand against branding, many small arts groups and individuals have far fewer options. As a consequence, many artists now worry more about marketing than producing original or provocative works of art. Documentary filmmakers, for example, once preoccupied with sponsor-free mediated truth, increasingly align themselves with corporate brands with deep pockets to produce films that are consistent with company mission statements. Even protest groups and activists have adopted branding strategies and aligned themselves with specific corporations to get the message out.

As branding replaces the real and authentic in an already virtual world, it is not only artists and activists who are being changed; it is society itself. Sarah Polley’s protest may prove to be an important opening salvo in a critical debate around branding and the effect it is having on our culture. Without culture’s steadying hand, we have only entertainment, amusement, and distraction as our guides. As Joan Rivers used to say, “Can we talk...?”