Naming rights raise a lot of money. Think of professional sports stadiums like Chicago’s own US Cellular Field (does US Cellular still exist??) The amazing thing to me is that when Comiskey Park changed names to “The Cell,” local media played right along and gave away free advertising by parroting the name in their daily sports roundups. Somehow the stadium knew that this coordination/holdup problem would be solved in their favor.
We should seize on this. But not by selling positive associations to corporations that want to promote their brand. Instead lets brand badly-behaving corporations with negative associations.
The Exxon Valdez oil spill is a name that stuck. Every single time public media refer to that event they remind us of the association between Exxon and the mess they made. No doubt we will continue to refer to the current disaster as the BP Gulf spill or something like that. That is good.
But why stop there? (Positive) advertisers have learned that you can slip in the name of a brand before, after, and in-between just about any scripted words and call it an ad. The Tostitos Fiesta Bowl. The Bud Lite halftime show. The X brought to you by Y. These are positive associations.
Think of all the negative events and experiences that are just waiting to be put to use as retribution by negative association. “And today I am here to announce that the BP National Debt will soon reach 15 trillon Dollars.” Or “The BP recession is entering its fifth consecutive quarter with no end in sight.”
Why are we wasting hurricane names on poor innocents like Katrina and Andrew? I say for the 2010 hurricane season we ditch the alphabetical order and line em up in order of egregiousness. “Hurricane Blackwater devastates the Florida Coast. Tropical Storm Halliburton kills hundreds in Central America.”
The nice thing about negative naming is that supply is virtually unlimited. Cities don’t go selling the names of every street in town because selling the marginal street requires lowering the price. But you can put the name of every former VP at Enron and Arthur Andersen on their own parking meter and the last one makes you want to spit just as much as the first. Hey, what about parking tickets? This parking ticket is brought to you by Washington Mutual.
Suddenly the inefficiency of city bureaucracy is a valuable social asset. Welcome to the British Petroleum DMV, please take your place in line number 8. And some otherwise low-status professions will now be able to leverage that position to provide an important public service. “There’s some stubborn tartar on that molar, Ms. Clark, I’m going to have to use the Toyota Prius heavy-duty scaler. You might feel some scraping. Rinse please.”
“Good Afternoon, Pleasant Meadow Morturary, will you be interested in Goldman Sachs cremation services today?” Or “Mr. Smith we are calling to confirm your appointment for a British Petroleum colonoscopy on Monday. Please be on time and don’t eat anything 24 hours prior.”
Just as positive name-association is a lucrative business, these ne’er-do-wells would of course pay big money to have their names removed from the negative icons and that’s all for the better. If the courts can place a cap on their legal liability this gives us a simple way to make up the difference.
And I am ready to do my part. As much as I like one-word titles Sandeep and I are going to add a subtitle to our new paper. Its going to be called “Torture: Sponsored by BP.”
Cheap Talk 
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 27, 2010 at 11:29 pm
The Destructionist
In light of the BP oil calamity it’s quite obvious that something must be done, and fast, if we are to save our world from corporations that would prefer to place huge profits above that of our environmental and financial welfare.
As large corporations gobble up smaller corporations in an attempt to seize an even bigger piece of the global economic pie, it seems that businesses have been allowed to grow, unfettered, into unwieldy corporate behemoths (a.k.a., British Petroleum) with little, if any, regulations regarding their obligations to national sovereignties or allegiances.
Maybe it’s just me, but I believe that if a corporation begins its “life” in a particular country, than it has an obligation to that country and its people: due in part to the patronage of its citizens throughout the years in helping that corporation to grow. When I hear about American businesses pulling up stakes and moving to other countries in lieu of cheaper labor and supplies elsewhere, I feel both embarrassed and betrayed. (They would be nothing if it weren’t for people like you and me. After all, we purchased their services, time and time again, fostering them constantly by giving them the opportunity to flourish. Our final reward for all our efforts? Millions of fellow Americans out of work, all desperately hoping that their unemployment benefits never run out.)
I agree that the bad news is not just happening here in America, but around the globe. I blame that on the evolution of the business model: over the years, it has been compressed into a precise science in an effort to squeeze every last drop of profit out of the proverbial “bottom-line.” I began to notice the change in the late 1970’s when I was in my teens. Back then, it was a different world for me and I didn’t seem to care too much. Today however, it is a different story.
What can we collectively do as Americans?
Contact your representatives in the House and Senate. Let them know that
big business should be regulated and ask them to enact laws to:
1.Ensure that all corporations “born” within the United States deter from any and all actions that would adversely affect our country;
2.Place high tariffs on imports from American businesses that move their bases of operations (not to mention our jobs) to other regions of the world;
3.Work to limit their corporate power and influence in Washington D.C. by passing laws whereby politicians, found to have ties with said corporations or corporate lobbyists resign.
4.Endeavor to ban all corporate favors and corporate lobbyists from Washington D.C.
Essentially, it’s up to us to fashion our own future. If we don’t, rest assured that someone, or some corporation will.
•(I know that BP was not born and reared here in the United States. I was merely using it as a reference as to what corporations are capable of doing if left to their own devices.)
May 28, 2010 at 12:00 am
Morgan Warstler
I think it is far easier to focus our efforts on radically changing what “public service” entails.
Perhaps we should make it impossible to gain wealth while one is a public servant with any power to decide anything – elected or otherwise.
No matter how much they have in holdings before they take the job force them to place all of it in trust and earn 5% per annum payable when they leave office, working for the government. Savings + 5% that’s all you get. Hell with the pension, they shouldn’t get anything past inflation.
Then expose them to random account audits with the threat of criminal prosecution.
End all fancy dinners. Jet travel. etc. Unless they are accounted as income.
The idea is if government service is not a path to personal power and wealth, they will spend their time doing the idealistic thing they claim they came there for BECAUSE corrupting them is all but impossible.
Now there’s no reason to limit an private spending on elections of otherwise, because we’ve made corruption virtually impossible in modern government.
May 28, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Matthew Daniels
Yes, let’s do that. Let’s ask our government officials to radically reduce their incomes and job perks. That’ll work.
And don’t think that corruption is ever impossible. In this case, you’ve assumed that whatever government officials do these random account audits are, themselves, incorruptible.
Good ideas aren’t useful unless they’re reasonable.
PS: What do you mean by “impossible to gain wealth?” Isn’t being given an income as increase in wealth? (Surely you’re not proposing that these people don’t have incomes.) I think I just don’t understand what you mean there.
May 28, 2010 at 10:42 am
Dan Garrett
Hmmm, to point out the obvious I suppose, the law already allocates the rights to these companies not to have their names associated with arbitrary social nuisances. That just means they would sue for defamation.
May 28, 2010 at 10:46 am
Nate
evolution has selected us for our constant need for more. we are all BP. maybe we should cut them some slack.
May 28, 2010 at 10:56 am
QED Real Estate Consulting
Thanks Cheap Talk for another great blog.
Nate. I don’t know where you got your idea of evolution. Maybe it was from Ayn Rand, or something, but you need to do some reading on evolution. That stereotype just doesn’t fly. How about Wilson’s book Evolution for Everyone.
In light of this great blog do not try and put evolution together with BP.
May 28, 2010 at 11:21 pm
dalena johnson
keep up the good work i enjoyed reading your blog
June 6, 2010 at 10:48 am
Nageeb Ali
Even if negative naming isn’t possible, one can count on Despair.com to profit from some peoples’ desire to do it. If you haven’t seen it already, check out:
http://www.despair.com/bp.html
and
http://www.despair.com/toyota.html