There is a fascinating article in today's Guardian by Naomi Klein exploring how brands have changed since she wrote No Logo 10 years ago. She starts by talking of a new coffee shop that has no brand identity, it is decorated with one-offs but is actually a Starbucks and an Absolut vodka bottle that has no label. No brand has become a brand identity, no brand has become a selling point.
The corporate brand has received a hammering in the past 10 years, and so it is not surprising that the emergent brand, or the emerging church is now in some sectors, also receiving a hammering as people disassociate themselves from a movement that they once valued deeply. No brand is the selling point.
The article moved on to talk about Obama as the ultimate brand and how he has managed to encapsulate all that a brand can be, a person becomes the brand, the embodiment of what people aspire to. She points out that the media only focuses on the positive things that he does - yes he publically declared that he was closing Guatanamo but he expanded the notorious Bagram prison in Afganistan - yet the media focuses on the big selling points as the brand is so attractive.
I wonder if we can learn from this in the emerging church movement? Have we moved from being a brand 'emerging church' a movement that has people who seem to embody the brand? (I can't be one of them because I'm an ordained Priest in the institution). Do we look to certain people and put our hopes in them because they are the embodiment of what we want church or Christianity to be? Obama is a powerful brand, but it is a brand that is accountable to the people of the US, are ours?
Recent Comments