https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/656389
This article on Jstor uses Logos and Pathos arguments to analyze consumer trends and theories related to them. The article is purely academic and its intended audience is for scholarly individuals conducting research on the trends of subgroups. The article comes from the Journal of Consumer Research and was published from the Oxford University Press, so just reading the title we can assume the work has substantial credibility and reliability. The article uses several sources, studies and theories to dissect contemporary trends, mainstream products and the American image. It breaks apart the previous misconception that brands create people. Certain images are tied to certain brands and as consumers we take up those images. However, they provide an alternate theory where subgroups create certain identities and then brands exploit those identities and make them mainstream. The researches use fairly recent and well known examples of brands and fads to remain relevant throughout the article. They use examples like Jeep, Star Trek, Harley Davidson and Hipsters. They explain cultural and social trends from a sociological studies standpoint giving the reader a sense of trustworthiness. The article suggests that the hipster brand and icon may have been original, but was ultimately re purposed into a brand by branding the hipster myth and the ideas that coincide with it.
The article doesn’t mean to disrespect the hipster culture or to even defame it, rather it seems to provide insights to a social pattern that we personally ignore in a capitalists society. We may create trends for our own purposes or for a sense of identity, but they are always exploited. Where some see independence and rebellious nature, others see dollar signs. The article uses another great example of a trend that was somewhat unpopular for many. The Trekie trend of star trek enthusiast was for a long time frowned upon by many. However recently, many have exploited the ‘rebellious’ trend making it not only sexy and interesting, but mainstream. This isn’t because people suddenly came to their senses about star trek. Companies just exploited the trend and made it popular for their own financial gains.
The article suggests that many social movement have fallen victim of this financial gaze. Some see the gay movement as disgusting and unnatural. Some see it as beautiful and empowering. But investors see potential dollar signs. What brands do these gay consumers use? What are their morals and what do they identify with? They use this information and essentially exploit these ideas to create a consumer base. This article raises serious questions about the ethics of such a society. Is it moral to exploit gay rights activists, even if you are essentially empowering them and helping them achieve their goals? What if the next movement is a Neo-Nazi fear mongering group? Would such a society empower them just for financial gain? Since this article is purely academic and theoretical it doesn’t take a strong stance for either side.