Are brands born political?
- Abhijit Das
- Apr 12
- 4 min read
Updated: Apr 14
Brands are born and baked for competitive advantage. They build influence and bend popular opinion towards its own products of culture. But does it have to be political? Could it avoid getting politicized?
What is “political”?
Commonly when we call something "political" we relate it to governance, power structures, or the organization of society (for instance formal government institutions, elections and policy-making).
It can refer to issues where different groups in society have competing interests or values that must be negotiated.
It may indicate matters involving the distribution of resources, rights, or opportunities among different populations.
It might suggest topics where power dynamics are at play—who has influence, whose voices are heard, and how decisions affecting communities are made.
In the context of above implications imagine both Socialism and Capitalism for example, which is inherently political. They represent competing visions of how economic power should be organized, who should control resources, and what principles should guide distribution. Neither of these systems could be implemented as a purely "technical" solution divorced from values, power relations, and social priorities. The perception that one system is "more political" than the other often stems from which system is treated as the default in a given society.
Seemingly neutral aspects of life (from personal choices to cultural products) exist within and are shaped by larger systems of power. To that effect, brands are political, be it baked-for-profit (Tesla/Amazon) or built for greater good (WTO/UN).
We may also want to entertain the distinction between something being “political” and something being “politicized” a bit deeper.
When we say something is "political" we're typically recognizing its inherent connection to questions of governance, power distribution, or societal organization. These matters are political by their very nature—things like tax policy, voting rights, or constitutional principles.
In contrast, when something is "politicized" it suggests a process where an issue that might not be inherently political has been deliberately brought into political discourse, often in a divisive way. This transformation typically involves:
Partisan framing: Issues become associated with specific political identities or parties.
Symbolic significance: The topic becomes a proxy for broader ideological battles.
Heightened emotional response: Discussion shifts from pragmatic problem-solving to moral positioning.
Highly esteemed brands like Nestle, Walmart, Amazon, Target, McDonald’s, KFC, BATA are increasingly getting affected online and on-ground.
Is economics political or politicized?
Economics as a field sits at a fascinating intersection of being both inherently political and often politicized. The ongoing US Tariff negotiations is a good example of this.
THE BIG QUESTION:
Can a business, business model, a brand strategy or the brand idea steer clear from the zone of being political or getting politicized?
The answer is not easy in this day and age when transparency is coming under strict regulation by governments and conscious scrutiny by consumers.
Consider the QR code stickers on food items which help consumers trace the country of origin. Especially since COVID it has become an essential ritual of purchase behavior for every Vietnamese shopping at any modern retail.
Or the black star label by the Danish chains (Netto, Føtex, Bilka) to help customers “buy European”.
In India, the country of origin (CO) declaration is generally mandatory on food items, especially for imported goods, according to regulations set by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). For imported food, the label must state the country where the food was produced. If a food product is processed in a second country, that processing country is considered the country of origin for labeling purposes.
On apparel items CO is generally mandatory in many countries, including the United States, India, and others. This declaration is often required on labels and also needs to be documented in trade agreements.
Remember when Shein faced allegations that its products contain cotton from China's Xinjiang province, where the U.S. and NGOs have accused the Chinese government of forced labour and human rights abuses targeting Uyghur people?
Beijing denied any abuse and declared its approved sources. (Reuters)
So yes, a business and its business model must be built carefully. More than ever.
The same goes for taste (creative license).
For instance, Zomato’s well intentioned advertising campaign for building awareness on recycling, its ad titled “Kachra” tickled everything but the funny bone in people. The word “Kachra” in hindi which stands for ‘waste’ [apt in the context of recycling] but the creative treatment of the idea invoked a rather terrible connotation related to casteism. Following the controversy, the NCSC (National Commission for Scheduled Castes) issued a notice to Zomato and the concerned administrative authorities forcing Zomato’s World Environment Day ad out of circulation. (Read the report)
The road ahead is raw and real for the business of brands.
Keeping a constant grip on evolving contexts is critical to say the least.
Comments