Vigilante Marketing and Consumer Created Communications

Journal of Advertising, vol. 36, no. 3 (Fall 2007), pp. 187–202.© 2007 American Academy of Advertising. All rights reserved.

ISSN 0091-3367 / 2007 $9.50 + 0.00.DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360303

Advertising as a practice has been greatly affected by recent trends in technology and media. Beyond the traditional notions of corporate-generated, paid, dissemination of one-to-many marketing messages, new technologies allow for more per-sonal, targeted communications, as well as increased consumer participation in the creation of marketing and brand-related information (Cappo 2003; Jaffe 2005). Amidst the cacophony of brand-related voices vying for attention, consumers are increasingly revealing themselves to be interested in, and more than capable of, contributing to the brand promoting conversation (Garfi eld 2005; Jaffe 2005; Wipperfurth 2005). Consumers, acting independently of marketers and advertis-ers, have started creating and disseminating documents that strongly resemble in form and intent ads for the brands that they love (Flight 2005; Kahney 2004b). Many are for brands with strong communal aspects (Ives 2004).

Consumer-generated content has been created by fans of the Apple iPod, Coca-Cola, Firefox (Web browser), Molson (beer), Nike, and Volkswagen, among other brands. Such customer evangelism goes by many names, including “homebrew ads” (Kahney 2004b), “folk ads” (O’Guinn 2003), “open source” branding (Garfi eld 2005), and “vigilante marketing” (Ives 2004). We prefer the term vigilante marketing as it most accu-rately captures the phenomenon. Merriam-Webster (2006) de-

fi nes a vigilante as “a self-appointed doer of justice.” Consumers creating such content are acting as self-appointed promoters of the brand and often have fi rm convictions regarding what is right and wrong for it. We thus defi ne vigilante marking as unpaid advertising and marketing efforts, including one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many commercially oriented communications, undertaken by brand loyalists on behalf of the brand. Some of these creations rival, in terms of professionalism and creativity, the offi cial ads produced for these brands (Ives 2004). Advertising Age columnist Bob Garfi eld labeled George Master’s unsolic-ited (and unpaid) homebrew commercial for the Apple iPod a “Masterpiece” (Garfi eld 2005, p. 1). Many of these creations spread rapidly via e-mail, without revealing their authorship and offering little clue as to whether or not they are offi cial corporate content.

While not, strictly speaking, falling into the category of “advertising” as traditionally defi ned (because corporate funds are not expended for their creation or dissemination), such creations are highly relevant to advertisers for several reasons. First, they provide evidence of consumer perceptions of brands and brand attributes. Second, they are vivid examples of the most compelling marketing messages from the perspective of brand loyalists. Third, and perhaps most signifi cantly, they are only going to increase in frequency and prominence (Jaffe 2005). Given wider trends in on-line communication, wherein consumer-created content is rapidly increasing in many domains (Kahney 2004a), such activities should not be surprising. Some even go so far as to assert that these challenges are revolutionary. Even members of the so-called old guard, such as integrated marketing communications (IMC) guru Don Shultz, understand and believe this notion:

Media advertising, as we have known, practiced, and wor-shipped it for the past sixty or so years, is in trouble. Big trouble. And it’s not going to get well. Ever. (Shultz 2005, p. xi)

VIGILANTE MARKETING AND CONSUMER-CREATED COMMUNICATIONS

Albert M. Muñiz Jr. and Hope Jensen Schau

ABSTRACT: Consumers, acting independently of marketers and advertisers, have started creating and disseminating docu-ments that strongly resemble, in form and intent, ads for the brands that they love. Employing a netnographic method, this paper investigates consumer-generated, commercially relevant artifacts by examining the brand community centered on the Apple Newton, a brand that was (along with its supporting advertising) discontinued in 1998. The members of the Newton community create commercially relevant content to fi ll the void created by the lack of advertising for the brand. These artifacts refl ect tensions with the marketer, the market, and the community itself, and imbue the brand with powerful meaning. These data reveal that consumers can be quite skilled in the creation of brand-relevant communica-tions, applying the styles, logics, and grammar of advertising. The ascendancy of consumer-generated content prefi gures revolutionary changes in how advertising is defi ned and practiced.

Albert M. Muñiz, Jr. (Ph.D., University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign) is an associate professor of marketing, College of Com-merce, DePaul University.

Hope Jensen Schau (Ph.D., University of California, Irvine) is an assistant professor of marketing, Eller College of Management, University of Arizona. The authors wish to thank the following people for commenting on earlier versions of this manuscript: Eric Arnould, Richard Elliott, Steven Kates, Cele Otnes, Linda Price, Cristel Russell, and Mary Wolfi nbarger.

03 muniz.indd 187 7/3/2007 11:45:52 AM

188 The Journal of Advertising

He continues:

Traditional media advertising, with its myths, traditions, pecking orders, perks and privileges, is being replaced by gaming, on-demand, communal, and consumer-generated content and the host of other, more relevant approaches. We likely will never, ever see a commercial like Apple’s “1984,” simply because there will never, ever be a similar venue or a similarly focused audience. While that’s a shame, it’s reality. So let’s move on. (Shultz 2005, p. xiv)

Noted Advertising Age columnist Bob Garfi eld recently made similar observations (Garfi eld 2005). Whether or not the future of advertising is as imperiled as such observers believe (also see Jaffe 2005), it is clear that advertising and brand promotion face some signifi cant challenges. Meeting these challenges will require a major shift in the way advertising is defi ned and practiced. Despite the signifi cance of these phenomena, there is still much to be learned about them.

Using a netnographic method, this paper investigates consumer-generated, commercially centered artifacts by examining the brand community centered on the Apple Newton, a brand that was (along with its supporting adver-tising) discontinued in 1998. While the Newton brand was abandoned, the larger Apple brand lives on. This unique com-munity site allows us to witness the ways a brand community builds commitment to the brand and the community in the absence of corporate advertising and promotion. This site also allows us an exceptional vantage from which to examine con-sumer-created advertising artifacts and the meanings a brand community attaches to them. Our data demonstrate effective consumer-generated communications for the Apple Newton that are collectively created, disseminated, and distilled within a strong consumer-controlled brand community. These data reveal much about consumer-to-consumer communications, including consumers’ sophistication and agility in mimicking the conventions of advertising in order to invest brands with the meanings they seek. We conclude by offering implications for advertising theory and practice.

ADVERTISING AND BRAND COMMUNITIES

Consumers use advertisements for their meaning as well as their product information (McCracken 1986; Mick and Buhl 1992; Ritson and Elliot 1999). Advertising practitioners are aware of this and appear to take it into account when design-ing ads that are intentionally polysemic (Kates and Goh 2003; Ritson and Elliott 1999). Meaning in advertising is quite powerful, affecting the self-defi nition of the consumer (Shields and Heinecken 2002) and frequently insinuating itself into everything from everyday conversation (Alperstein 1990) to complex consumer ritual (Otnes and Scott 1996). Because brands become incorporated into the consumer’s self-identity

and have a prominent role in defi ning and communicat-ing complicated and important identity projects to others (Schau and Gilly 2003), the signifi cance of brand meaning, particularly that derived from advertising content, cannot be overstated. Some have even suggested that the meaning of a brand is its most important characteristic (O’Guinn and Mu-ñiz 2005). Obviously, consumers value brand and advertising meaning quite highly.

The powerful role of the social context in the interpretation of advertising meaning is well established. Advertisements are powerful shared texts that structure and become intertwined with much social interaction. Ritson and Elliott (1999) dem-onstrate the many ways advertising structures social interaction between adolescents. Adolescents’ evaluative discussions of current advertising campaigns are important mechanisms for revealing preferences and viewpoints to one another. Similarly, Alperstein (1990) noted the importance of the social context of advertising consumption when he described the ways televi-sion advertising content worked its way into everyday social conversations. The social context of advertising powerfully infl uences the way ads are interpreted and the way in which the resulting brand meanings are used.

Contributing to these powerful contextual effects is the fact that various social groups share interpretive strategies for advertisements. These groups can be based on ethnicity (Motley, Henderson, and Baker 2003), gender (Kates and Shaw-Garlock 1999), or nationality (O’Donohoe 1997). For example, O’Donohoe (1997) studied the meanings that ado-lescents in Scotland attached to ads, based on the perceived country of origin of the ads. She found these adolescents to be “agile and active readers” (p. 693) of advertisements. More-over, the meanings they ascribed to the ads were intertwined with their sense of national and local identity, with ads that most accurately represented Scotland and Scottishness being appreciated more than those that illegitimately attempted to employ those themes. The nature and cultures of social groups affect the ways members of such groups interpret and attach meanings to ads.

While the importance of culturally bound meanings of advertisements has been recognized, little attention has been directed at the subcultural interpretive frame represented by collectives of the brand’s most devoted fans. How do brand communities support, alter, or challenge the meanings of-fered by the advertiser? Evidence suggests that they can be quite powerful in this regard. Some of the brand community members studied by Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001) created Web pages that featured advertising for the brand. These members celebrated the advertisements, accepted the meanings they offered, and used them to attach meaning to their own experi-ences with the brand. Mills, Boylstein, and Lorean (2001) re-port similar fi ndings. They looked at advertising for the Saturn (automobile), which at the time emphasized themes of commu-

03 muniz.indd 188 7/3/2007 11:45:52 AM

Fall 2007 189

nity and affi liation, and its impact on Saturn consumers. They discovered that these community and affi liation themes were also present in the interpersonal stories told by consumers. On the other hand, some of the informants studied by Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001) were quite critical of the marketing for their brands, disapproving of advertising strategies and executions. Instead of simply accepting marketer-suggested meanings for these brands, members sometimes rejected them and created their own divergent meanings through elaborate images or personal stories.

Brand communities are the site of complex brand meaning creation and consumption efforts. As such, they may be the best place to look for instances of vigilante marketing. Cer-tainly, this is the perspective of many practitioners writing in this area (Atkins 2004; Wipperfurth 2005). Advertising and brand meaning fi gure quite prominently into brand communi-ties; advertising is frequently discussed, meanings are openly negotiated, and corporate communications become part of the brand lexicon, and indeed the ethos, of the community (Kates 2002; Schau and Muñiz 2002). Given these realities, we examine consumer-generated content in an abandoned brand community (Muñiz and Schau 2005). We reason that if brand communities are the site of such behaviors, then an abandoned brand community might present more robust versions. Such a unique community site would represent the phenomena in its purest form.

METHOD

The Apple Newton Community as a Brand Community Site

The Apple Newton was the earliest entrant into the personal digital assistants (PDAs) product category. It was rushed to market in 1993, but was far from bug-free. Its problems were widely reported and lampooned in the media, which discour-aged many potential adopters. As a result, the Newton never achieved critical mass. It did, however, engender a strong and fi ercely loyal grassroots community (Wagner 1998). While close to 200,000 users were estimated at the height of its popularity (Cooper 1998), the Newton lost its lead in the emerging PDA category to the Palm Pilot in 1996 and was offi cially discontinued by Apple in February of 1998. Despite being discontinued, the Newton brand community continues to thrive (Kahney 2004c). Roughly three to four thousand Newton users are active participants in on-line forums. Re-searcher fi eld notes reveal that the participants in these forums are quite active and vocal in their consumption and interpre-tation of the brand. Members are in frequent contact about a variety of brand-specifi c issues. The Newton brand community has a lengthy history of producing consumer-generated brand content. Members have long-created artifacts (documents, im-

ages, videos) to create brand meaning. Many of these artifacts resemble advertisements and are intended to serve many of the same functions as advertising.

Netnographic Procedures

Data

Data collection for this project combines observation, par-ticipant observation, and interview methods. These include individual and communal consumer-generated brand-related artifacts, messages posted to two forums that are central to the community, several user-created Web pages devoted to the New-ton, researcher fi eld notes, and a series of interviews conducted with members of the community. A netnographic approach (Kozinets 2002) was deemed appropriate after extended obser-vation of the community revealed the Internet to be the chief way members of this community interact. An ethnographic ap-proach like this (Wolcott 1994) also allowed us to delve deeply into complex community meanings. We began observing this community in mid-2000, two and a half years after the Newton had been discontinued. The data we report are longitudinal and our observation of the community is ongoing.

A sizeable portion of the data for this study includes the messages that members post to one another via two commu-nity forums (both pseudonymously disguised): the alt.fan.newton Usenet newsgroup and the Newt.net listserv. These two forums are the primary means by which members of the Newton community interact and artifacts are disseminated. Advertising and brand-related discourse is common in these forums. Such discussions include evaluations of the original Newton advertising, as well as presentations and discussions of user-created brand content, some of which is explicitly designed to resemble advertising in form and function. Thirty-fi ve user-created Web pages were also examined. A maximum variation sampling scheme (Miles and Huberman 1994) was used to capture a variety of themes and styles. The examination of these Web sites is consistent with a recent study of personal Web space content (Schau and Gilly 2003). Consumer-created artifacts were selected for analysis based on two distinct but highly related criteria: breadth of dissemination and breadth of discussion. The artifacts analyzed were all disseminated via public Web sites and were discussed extensively in at least one of the community forums. These artifacts became the central focus of our inquiry.

Interviews were conducted with members of the Newton community regarding the artifacts and their meanings to the members of the community. Observation preceded entry, allowing us to conduct informed interviews. To recruit vol-unteers, we used a research Web page, which we announced via postings to the two community forums. Ninety people responded with answers to our questions. After reading the

03 muniz.indd 189 7/3/2007 11:45:52 AM


original responses, we contacted individual members of the community with follow-up questions. In this way, we began an ongoing dialogue with several members of the community. Some of these evolved into extended e-mail discussions, as well as several telephone and face-to-face interviews. Here, too, a maximum variation sampling scheme was used to ensure that a variety of informant perspectives were represented. Table 1 provides a summary of our data.

Both researchers made extensive use of fi eld notes. These notes revealed the strong and complex nature of the com-munity, but suggested that we were too removed from our object of study. To address this issue, the lead author engaged in participant observation. In January 2003, the lead author bought a Newton 2100, quickly became attached to it, and used it for a variety of tasks, including composing researcher fi eld notes. His announcement to the community that he had purchased a Newton produced positive reactions and an out-pouring of support and assistance. After using a Newton for several weeks, the importance of the community in keeping these complex devices operating was readily apparent. This author’s brand community membership provided an impor-tant and unique perspective, as well as empathy with the community and its plight. It has also provided an important source of credibility with other members of the community. The second author was a nonparticipant observer. These two perspectives provided benefi cial interpretive perspective and tension (Denzin 1998).

Analysis

Analysis and interpretation of the data described above was an iterative process of interpreting, deriving new questions, searching for and collecting new data, rejecting, confi rming, and refi ning our emerging interpretations until they stood the weight of the data. We relied on Wolcott’s (1994) ethno-graphic conventions in this endeavor, moving continuously among our focal artifacts, interview transcripts, and fi eld notes. We worked iteratively through the data to identify recurring themes and motifs to produce a thick description of Newton brand community culture. In addition, we created an interpretation of Newton brand community culture by making inferences from the data while relying on the litera-ture on brand community as a guide (Creswell 1998). As our thinking progressed, we downloaded additional threads from the forums and conducted additional interviews to look for counterexamples to challenge our interpretations. Member checks were also conducted. On multiple occasions, we have placed our interpretations on our research page and invited members to comment on them. These comments suggested that our emerging interpretations were on the right track toward emic validity. After many iterations, we believe we achieved suffi cient interpretive convergence.

FINDINGS

The Newton community easily satisfi es the criteria for being a brand community as established by Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001). Consciousness of kind, moral responsibility and rituals and traditions are all evident. Researcher fi eld notes reveal that members engage in numerous varied activities to perpetuate the community and assist others using the brand. Members can and do acquire, use, promote, repair, modify, and recycle their Newtons without any support from the fi rm. The community is entirely self-sustaining, as Apple is no longer involved.

Still, the Newton community is in a perilous position. This is a widespread perception among members. Service, assistance and new applications are diffi cult to obtain. Most of these tasks are performed by members. In the case of developing new ap-plications, the more skilled members of the community can be counted on to solve the most pressing problems, but their efforts cannot be as complete as a full marketplace of develop-ers. Members are burdened with additional challenges, ranging from getting the device to work with newer desktop operating systems, to the prodding of friends, family, and colleagues to adopt newer devices. In addition, the more time passes, the more members will be lost due to the physical failure of the device. A common challenge or threat can be a powerful source of unity and inspiration (Hunter and Suttles 1972; Kephart and Zellner 1994). It can also be the motivation for the de-ployment of compelling stories and images (Halperin 1998; Janowitz 1952). This appears to be what is happening here. The Newton community is threatened and is responding to this threat by creating powerful meanings for the brand.

These meaning-making activities take a variety of forms, including actions intended to fi ll the void created by the lack of advertising for the brand. Members create a lot of content to perpetuate and extend the Newton image, including many that are explicitly designed to look like advertisements. Researcher fi eld notes reveal several instances in which advertising-like content was offered to the community as an “alternative New-ton ad.” Toward this end, it should also be noted that many current Newton users only became aware of the Newton after its demise via the word-of-mouth of other users. In essence,

TABLE 1Data Summary

Observation of on-line community 6 yearsParticipant observation of on-line community 3.5 yearsInitial electronic member interviews 90 (unique)Follow-up electronic member interviews 50 of initialExtended researcher-member 22 electronic exchanges (> 3) Telephone member interviews 10Face-to-face member interviews 5Member Web sites 35

03 muniz.indd 190 7/3/2007 11:45:52 AM

Fall 2007 191

consumer-driven communications were more effective in at-tracting new users for this brand than were the offi cial corpo-rate campaigns. Vigilante marketing has a long and successful history in the Apple Newton brand community.

The Newton users are somewhat angry, defi ant, and rebel-lious. They contest cultural meanings given to the Newton brand by the marketer, and the larger market. They strive to prevent user apathy and attrition. They work diligently to reframe symbols, distance themselves from the marketer, and defend their right to exist and consume. These sentiments are expressed in a variety of forms and are directed at three primary targets: the (now absent) marketer, the market, and the members of the community itself. Apple is frequently targeted for not doing enough to promote the brand and for discontinuing it prematurely. The market is targeted for its failure to recognize and embrace the Newton. Existing users are challenged to push their Newtons further, to do more for the community, and to believe that anything is possible. The tension refl ected and perpetuated in these artifacts is a central part of the community experience.

Contesting the Marketer

Most community members blame Apple for the failure of the product that led to its abandonment. Many single out the ad-vertising for the brand. Consider the following comments:

Apple didn’t know how to market/explain the concept. Which leads to a second problem. . . . people won’t spend $1,500 on something they can’t see value in. When Palm came along at $300, people thought they were the same and bought the cheaper (and smaller) units. (Phil, male, interview)

Another user blames the poor consumer awareness the Newton has suffered on the low amount of advertising.

Lack of advertising—I can’t even count the number of times someone has stopped me to ask about my Newtons. They have never seen one and have no idea Apple even made a PDA. (George, male, interview)

Many members of the community shared similar opinions about Apple’s advertising for the Newton. It is a frequent topic of conversation in the community forums. Field notes reveal it as something members discuss when considering the history or the ultimate fate of the community and the brand it is centered on. The major contentions of members are threefold: that the Newton was not suffi ciently promoted (not enough advertising), that the Newton was not properly positioned as a complex multiattribute computing machine, and that the Newton ads were not representative of actual us-ers and usage.1 These concerns may explain the community preoccupation with brand-meaning creation. They certainly

attest to the signifi cance of advertising and brand meaning for devoted loyal users.

The theme of anger and defi ance toward Apple is common in the user-created content. Consider the example in Figure 1. This document, and a similar companion piece, was cre-ated shortly after Apple discontinued the Newton. Most of the community members we interviewed were familiar with these images and what they conveyed about the Newton brand experience. Both documents were widely distributed and can still be found on community members’ sites. Both contain the Apple logo and both mimic Apple advertising of the time (Collins 1998). Both play with the Apple advertising tag line “Think Different” to reference user outrage and both empha-size brand loyalty that was punished when the Newton was discontinued. These user-created artifacts are obvious in their deployment of advertising rhetoric, including contrivances used by Apple. They are an angry yet sophisticated rallying call to the community.

Researcher fi eld notes reveal several instances of the appro-priation of Apple advertising and branding conventions:

Found several references to the “Newton underground.” Ap-pears to be a loose collective of Web sites from shortly after the product was discontinued. Uses a modifi ed Jolly Roger as symbol that includes the requisite skull and crossbones, as well as the Newton brand logo—an illuminated light bulb

FIGURE 1Consumer-Created Ad Contesting the Marketer

03 muniz.indd 191 7/3/2007 11:45:52 AM


indicating an idea. Striking combo of visuals. Makes point well and fi ts with the defi ant feel of these sites. (Researcher fi eld notes, October 2001)

Similarly, the Newt.net listserv developed its own logo featur-ing the original Newton logo and a member-created slogan, “Ink Different,” also derived from the “Think Different” tag line. See Figure 2 for an image of this logo, which was used on community T-shirts. So many Newton users have adopted this logo, in both Web sites and signature fi les, that it could be considered a consumer-generated brand content convention of the Newton brand community, post-Apple.

Members also rework Apple advertising content in order to create their own powerful meanings for the Newton. Consider the example in Figure 3. The creator of this artifact has taken branding and advertising conventions from a variety of sources, including Apple (picture of Steve Jobs), Newton (Newton light bulb icon), and the James Bond movie franchise (the title—a play on “Tomorrow Never Dies”—and the action images). The resulting image simultaneously challenges the marketing decision of Apple to abandon the Newton (note how Steve Jobs occupies the position of the villain) and reminds Newton own-ers that their devices are far from dead. Indeed, the imagery of this ad suggests the Newton is powerful, versatile and, to an extent, sexy. These were properties Apple probably never in-tended for the brand. This ad resonates with the community to this day. Several other Newton Web sites link to the image and accompanying MIDI fi le (which plays the James Bond theme) and a number of member signature fi les incorporate the tag

line “Newton Never Dies” (sometimes amending it to include “it just gets its batteries recharged”). This is an important part of the community-created meaning for the Newton brand. In contrast, Apple’s ads for the Newton are typically referred to derisively. Much consumer-generated content may be borne of frustration with extant advertising efforts.

Such appropriation of these advertising and branding conventions represents a subverting of the intended mean-ing to serve the meaning of a distinct group, in this case the brand community. Riston, Elliott, and Eccles (1996) describe the ways a lesbian group in the United Kingdom alters the mainstream meaning of Scandinavian furnishing store IKEA to create a subcultural identity. Similarly, Davidson (1992) describes the ways heroin users in the United Kingdom re-versed the meaning of a government-sponsored anti–heroin usage advertising campaign to make it into a celebration of the heroin subculture. In the Newton community, these subversive activities are intended to change the meaning of a technology brand to make it better refl ect their experience of it. Researchers studying the adoption and long-term use of a technology by groups call this process “antiprogram” (Akrich

FIGURE 2Consumer-Created Logo

FIGURE 3Consumer-Created Ad Drawing from Multiple Brand and Cultural Sources

03 muniz.indd 192 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM

Fall 2007 193

and Latour 1992, p. 260), a process by which a technological product is remade into what the group wants (as opposed to what the marketer intended). For example, Kline (2003) notes the ways rural Americans negotiated new meanings for the technological innovations of electrifi cation and the telephone in order to rid them of restrictive urban culture connotations of appropriate use. What is noteworthy in the Newton com-munity is that these processes are not limited to simply using the product in novel ways. Members of the Newton community also create various artifacts to elaborate on and reinforce these uses and changed meanings. This represents an extension of our understanding of antiprogram processes. Certainly, they suggest that antiprogram activities may increasingly play out in consumption collectives via consumer-generated content and vigilante marketing.

Defending the Brand from the Competition and the Larger Market

Many of these user-created objects express defi ance toward the larger market and other PDAs. Newton users recognize the challenge of animating a brand for a technology that has been discontinued for over nine years and act to protect the Newton brand from external encroachments. This has been demonstrated by several incidents in which the community reacted to protect Newton branding conventions and signs. In February of 2002, for example, a member posted a link to a Web site whose logo looked suspiciously like a “blatant copy of the Newton logo” of an illuminated light bulb. Researcher fi eld notes reveal that member reaction to this infraction was swift and decisive:

One of the frequent posters has created a Web page where you can compare [the offending company’s] new logo with the original Newton logo. It’s a clever tool that allows you to superimpose either logo over the other in order to judge the amount of overlap. Makes it pretty clear that the images are quite similar. (Researcher fi eld notes, February 2002)

Once convinced by the comparison that the similarities could not be accidental, other members e-mailed the offend-ing company, asking if they were aware of the similarities. Eventually, in a move widely regarded by the community as a victory, the company removed the offending logo. Such vigilant actions demonstrate the important symbolic power of the logo and the ever-present fear of its loss. Members speak, in sophisticated terms, of the need to prevent the “dilution of the brand” and the “death of the logo.” Someone else using the logo unchallenged would be a confi rmation of sorts that the brand was dead, despite the community’s best efforts to keep it viable.

In addition to the amorphous larger market, the community contests newer, competing PDAs, particularly the more suc-

cessful Palm. A 2002 Apple ad campaign entitled “Switch” urged PC users to switch from the PC to the Macintosh. This campaign caused quite a stir in the Apple community (Kahney 2002). It also resonated with many members of the Newton community as many Newton users have switched from compet-ing PDAs to the Newton. While discussing the Apple switch campaign, one member issued a call for the community to put together a “Switch to Newton campaign” that would use the same themes and conventions, but would encourage consumers to switch from competing PDAs to the Newton:

While sitting in the local Apple store last night, they were playing the “Switch” ads on the presentation screen in back and suddenly it hit me. I know that I’m not the only one here who has/is moved/moving from something else (a P*lm usually) to (or back to) a newtie. So, anyone here who would be interested in putting together some “Switch” ads of our own extolling the virtues of the Newton? (Louis, listserv, December 2002)

Note the use of the word “ad” in the call for this consumer-created content. The desired artifacts would be considered advertisements for the Newton brand and community. This is not uncommon.

An example of the content produced in response to this call is presented in Figure 4. This artifact combines elements of the Apple “Switch” campaign with the former advertising spokesman for Dell Computers to urge readers to switch to the Newton. While not of the highest professional quality, this ad spawned favorable community discussion, with several mem-bers using it as the background image on their Newton screens. The actions for brand-meaning creation in this example (as in the James Bond-esque movie poster discussed earlier) represent an interesting twist on the notion of advertising intertextual-ity. O’Donohoe (1997) noted that the meanings derived from advertising are greatly infl uenced by the consumption of other texts. Thus, the ability to decode a particular ad and derive meaning from it is often dependent on knowledge of another source material, such as a particular popular movie or song. Advertisers intentionally use intertextuality when creating ads and consumers are able to accommodate it when consuming ads. Here we see the consumers of this brand utilizing intertextual-ity in their collaborative meaning-creating endeavors. These consumers are demonstrating much agility in their utilization of the “leaky boundaries” (O’Donohoe 1997, p. 257) between advertising and other cultural texts via their appropriation of content from those texts. These consumers are literate enough in contemporary advertising principles to be able to use sophis-ticated conventions in the brand support content they create. Such advanced advertising literacy (Ritson and Elliott 1995) may explain the recent rise in vigilante marketing and related consumer-generated content. Growing up in an advertising-saturated culture may make writing ads relatively easy.

03 muniz.indd 193 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM


Once again, the actions of the Newton brand community in this regard have historical roots. Rather early on, mem-bers of the Newton community revealed themselves to be sophisticated critics of Newton advertising. Several times, members have suggested that Apple pay more attention to the competition in their advertising for the Newton. Typically, communal discussions followed concerning how this could best be accomplished. Consider the following:

I think that at this point, Apple might hire some of the con-sultants who created Democratic and Republican attack ads for the recent election. (I’m sure someone will fl ame me for encouraging the propagation of this kind of media negativity to the computer realm, but so be it.) An Apple ad would show a burly executive type open his little Casio job, breaking the screen off. Then after, say, taping the hinge up with duct tape, he’d fi nd that he can’t really fi nd any way to squeeze his large fi ngers into the space of the keyboard. Another scene might have him hailing a cab, and fi nding the feeble backlighting rendering his screen illegible, stealing glances at the nice yel-low glow of the Newton held by a sharply/elegantly dressed competitor for a cab; of course, the cab would pass up some-one using a WINCE job. And of course he’d bust that teeny insubstantial pen. Any other scenarios? (Mick, newsgroup, November 1996)

Note the sophisticated suggestions for this hypothetical ad. Also note the well-developed understanding of the typical

users of the different operating systems and the suggested consequences for using the wrong brand. This proposal gen-erated a number of positive responses, including alternative scenarios for such a comparison ad.

While oppositional tendencies have been noted previously in brand communities (Muñiz and O’Guinn 2001), they have an added urgency in this brand community because the focal brand is in real danger of disappearing, with its users migrating to these platforms. As a result, the means of communicating these oppositional notions have only become more pronounced and vivid. Consider the example in Figure 5. With a style reminiscent of Soviet propaganda posters, this object vividly displays a member’s devotion to the Newton by suggesting what effect switching to a Palm would have. The tendency to position against the competition so vividly is most likely a function of the threatened condition in which the community operates. These artifacts not only express defi ance toward the larger market and the competition but also create unique meanings. Moreover, such themes are common in consumer-generated content. Ives (2004) discusses the vigilante mar-keting surrounding Firefox Web browser, a brand that exists in opposition to the market-dominating Microsoft Internet Explorer. Much of the vigilante marketing created on behalf of Firefox emphasizes oppositional brand loyalty themes (see www.fi refoxfl icks.com for examples).

Boosting the Brand Community

The Newton community also needs to address threats from within its ranks. As the devices age and their repair and ex-tension become more diffi cult, user complacency, apathy, and attrition are signifi cant threats. Community boosterism is important in the Newton community, as it is in most com-munities (Delaney 1995; Strauss 1961), particularly those that have been abandoned (Leigh, Peters, and Shelton 2006; Muñiz and Schau 2005). Communities need shared symbols and “content for consensus” (Janowitz 1952, p. 71). From time to time, various members of the community challenge other users. Recall the Switch artifact discussed earlier (also see the Powerbook example discussed subsequently). Both were the result of calls challenging members to come up with their own Newton “ads.” Both also resulted in multiple documents that developed unique meanings for the Newton brand. Members need to be challenged in order to energize the community and keep it vital. Sometimes user-created content is explicitly designed to address this need. These range from stream-of-consciousness testimonials with titles like “Confessions of a Newton Junkie,” to more carefully scripted efforts.

In one instance, a member invited other Newton users to create texts “mimicking the old Powerbook ads where people talked about what system they had and what they had on there” (John, posted to his Newton Web site). The Apple Powerbook

FIGURE 4Consumer-Created Ad Drawing from Multiple Brand and Cultural Sources

03 muniz.indd 194 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM

Fall 2007 195

ads of concern were textual in nature and featured data on a different Powerbook user, including why they bought a Pow-erbook and how they used it. Consider the example in Figure 6. This is one of several user creations offered in response to the above invitation. The user-created Newton versions dem-onstrate what attributes and uses consumers truly value and would highlight to convince new users to adopt.

Another example of boosting the community can be found in the “Newtons around the world” gallery. A member of the community noted that iPod users had started a collection of images called “iPods around the world,” in which iPod users take pictures of their iPods in exotic and mundane settings (see Gallery.ipodlounge.com). Another member responded and challenged members of the Newton community to do the same with their Newtons. The call was enthusiastically answered, with contributors talking about the importance of supporting “the greater good” via their efforts. Currently, the gallery features over 170 images, showing Newtons in such places as Disney World (see Figure 7), Niagara Falls, Tokyo, Japan, and Wellington, New Zealand, with the Newtons being used in a variety of tasks from conducting interviews to count-ing electronic parts. It is a very communal and collaborative process. Members push one another to come up with more

powerful images and the results are pointed to and discussed with excitement. The take-away from these images is clear: The Newton is far from dead, as there are Newton users all around the world, using their Newtons for all kinds of purposes.

These practices continue. In early June 2005, over seven and a half years after Apple had discontinued the Newton, a member posted on the listserv a link to a movie he had created for the Newton community. The creator took parts from old television ads for the Newton, edited and rearranged them and added new narration, music, and visuals. We contacted and interviewed this member of the community to ask about his creation. His comments confi rm our interpretation that such artifacts are designed to fi ll the void left by the lack of advertising for the brand and to push members of the com-munity to do more.

OWEN: Everybody was sure the Newton was coming back in some new incarnation, and a lot of people came up with these, cobbled together, what they thought it would be. And I think in my movie, and I don’t even remember where I got it from, the last image that I have is somebody’s thing called the iPad. I wanted to make a call to somebody, and [say] “Apple, c’mon!” If everybody sees this and what it could do, I mean the satellite going, and the writing and it can fax, and speak to

FIGURE 5Consumer-Created Ad Emphasizing Oppositional Brand Loyalty Themes

03 muniz.indd 195 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM


laser printers . . . So if that’s good for our community, I hope so, you know, maybe we should all make movies and start sending them to Apple. That’s why I said in my little blurb at the end of my movie, you know, use the Newton community as a sales force, you don’t even have to hire anybody. Use the Newton community as the sales force. . . . It didn’t take a lot of thought because I just love the platform and it’s just a question of putting together my little story line.

I: [Laughs]

OWEN: I mean, quite frankly, I’m almost, I’m not completely not serious about it, I mean, one of the things I found so ex-hilarating about the computers these days and what we can do is delivering video on the Internet. I mean, it’s very accessible. If we can, video is compelling. It might be something that people are encouraged to go seek out and wanna look at.

I: So you think it could be an effective promotional tool?

OWEN: Absolutely. Everybody loves video. (Owen, male, interview)

This artifact certainly made an impact on the community, producing positive reactions sent directly to the creator (“great job, made my day,” “may the green shine upon you”)2 and extending into discussion in the forums. Consider the fol-lowing response:

That was soooo good, almost made me cry. Well done, Owen. I even loved the music, which is something from a classical bassoonist. It was only coincidence that I was wearing my black Newton T-shirt and black linen jeans (bare feet tho’). LOL, Marie. (female, listserv, July 2005)

Name: Mitch

Occupation: Veterinary Student

Newton: MP 110 (right now), getting an MP 2100 soon

Why I bought a Newton: I saw the MP 110 in a pawn shop, and thought it looked cool. It was also cheap. =) I was thinking about a Palm, but the Newton is a lot better than the Palms I’ve seen. I then read about the MP2100, and started drooling. Luckily, I found a friend of mine who hasn’t used his in forever, and bought it off of him. =)

What I love about the Newton: I love the laptop abilities in a smaller package. I will love the ability to use Ethernet.. =)

What I dislike: Steve Jobs. =) No, I think Apple was stupid for canceling them. I’d like a smaller form factor, and I wish there were more device drivers. I wish the interconnect port was more available. =)

Carrying case: The Apple Leather one for my 110.

Strangest place I’ve ever used my Newton: None yet. =) I’m planning on doing an externship to Great Britain next year, and I’ll probably take my MP2100 along.

What’s on my Newton: Mystic 8 Ball, SoloDX, and whatever the Othello for OS1.3 is (I can’t remember the name). (Mitch, Web site, 2000)

FIGURE 7Consumer-Generated Brand Promoting Image

FIGURE 6Consumer-Created Ad Mimicking Prior Apple Campaign

03 muniz.indd 196 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM

Fall 2007 197

Reaction to this video was so great that the creator began work on another one, soliciting the group for help in the form of ideas and images of their Newtons in use.

Many of the efforts at brand community boosterism are an attempt to legitimate the community and the values on which it is predicated (Hummon 1990; Leigh, Peters, and Shelton 2006; Muñiz and Schau 2005; Strauss 1961). Leigh, Peters, and Shelton (2006) note that extensive restoration and maintenance projects undertaken by MG drivers legitimize both individual members and the community itself. Similar things are at work here. In the Newton community, core values include a strong do-it-yourself ethic and a mastery over technology. By reifying these values, members of the Newton community are creating their own powerful brand meanings to reenergize the brand, perpetuate the community, and delay the onset of obsolescence. These activities are an example of what Mick and Fournier (1998) call technology consumption confrontation strategies. Such strategies are intended to allow consumers a feeling of control over technology. One such strategy is master-ing. Mastering “evokes a metaphorical frame of hierarchy and power” (p. 138). In the creation and deployment of powerful images and texts, members of the Newton brand community are imposing control over an increasingly chaotic product and brand. In so doing, they are attempting to inoculate the brand against obsolescence. Granted, the consumers of this study are undoubtedly more technologically advanced and market-savvy than the consumers studied by Mick and Fournier (1998). Still, the strategies displayed here offer a new twist on their fi ndings, as they demonstrate how these processes play out in communal consumption settings, via consumer-generated content, and in vigilante marketing.

The actions of the Newton community in this regard have historical roots. Rather early on (while Apple was still produc-ing the device), members of the Newton brand community diverged from the marketer in terms of what the Newton should be. Their divergence included product modifi cation, the creation of alternative brand meanings, and the creation of new applications. The Newton community fi rst contested the marketer’s defi nition of the product, and then refashioned the product and brand as they saw fi t. After the Newton was discontinued, the location of text production shifted to the consumer (Mitussis and Elliott 1999) and these same con-sumers created their own meanings, stressing the properties that they felt were most relevant. The historical roots of this consumer-generated content probably fostered the culture of innovation (Zien and Buckler 1997) that has been necessary for the Newton brand community to continually innovate the product to this day. If so, vigilante marketing may play an important role in encouraging user innovation (Von Hippel 2005). Vigilante marketing may offer user-innovators emo-tional support for their efforts while providing reassurance to the adopters of consumer-created innovations. The historical

roots of these activities may also go a long way to explaining the quantity of consumer-generated content encountered in the Newton brand community. All of this suggests that a few instances of consumer-generated content may precipitate many more instances in the future.

DISCUSSION

This research examines vigilante marketing by analyzing consumer-generated, brand-centered communications in the brand community centered on the Apple Newton, a product that was discontinued by the marketer over nine years ago. The consumers of the abandoned Apple Newton brand are now charged with responsibility for the entire brand-sustaining experience: modifying, repairing and innovating the product, as well as creating and sustaining brand meaning and com-munity. As part of these activities, members engage in vigi-lante marketing. They create brand artifacts, many of which explicitly resemble advertisements, to bind the community together, reify its values and beliefs, and continually revitalize the product. Moreover, they are quite skilled in these activities, successfully mimicking the styles, tropes, logic, and grammar of advertising for both Apple and other brands. What we see in the Newton brand community dovetails nicely with the recent proliferation of customer evangelism that goes by many names, including “homebrew ads” (Kahney 2004b), “folk ads” (O’Guinn 2003), “open source” branding (Garfi eld 2005), and “vigilante marketing” (Ives 2004). The fi ndings reported in this paper, taken together with these new marketplace behav-iors, have important—perhaps revolutionary—implications for advertising theory and practice.

Consumer-Generated Content

We have long known that consumers create their own meaning for ads (Mick and Buhl 1992). Sometimes, these meanings are quite removed from those intended by the marketer (Kates 2002). We also know that some consumers deliberately sub-vert the meanings created by marketers (O’Guinn and Muñiz 2005; Ritson, Elliott, and Eccles 1996). More recently, we have begun to see evidence that in such meaning-creation efforts, consumers can mimic the conventions of advertising (Flight 2005; Garfi eld 2005; Ives 2004). Owing to cheaper desktop audio, video, and animation software, consumers can easily create promotional content that rivals that which is produced professionally. Moreover, via the Internet, such creations can be quickly and inexpensively shared with a multitude of oth-ers. Vigilante marketing has already been seen for multiple brands such as Apple, Coke, Firefox, Molson, and Volkswa-gen (Flight; Ives 2004; Kahney 2004b). Some of it has been quite sophisticated (Garfi eld 2005). By several accounts, the tendency for consumers to create their own advertisements

03 muniz.indd 197 7/3/2007 11:45:53 AM


for the brands they like is only going to increase (Jaffe 2005). There is already at least one Web site business devoted to it (see www.adcandy.com). What we see in the Newton brand community is the logical extreme of such consumer meaning creation: consumers attempting to create meanings for a brand that is no longer advertised. This research demonstrates that consumers are, and have been, quite capable of a variety of these actions. Consumers, especially those who are members of brand communities, are more than able to be skillful, profi cient, and prolifi c in the creation of vigilante advertising content. There is no reason to doubt that the practice will spread beyond the examples contained herein.

These are noteworthy developments. At the very least, they push the boundaries of consumer meaning production to their furthest limits. Newton consumers are not cocreating meaning; they are sole-authoring it. Less conservatively, these fi ndings suggest something far more revolutionary—a change in the status quo with respect to the defi nition and practice of advertising. For starters, these fi ndings portend a shift in control. Brand communities, such as those centered on the Newton, the iPod, or Mozilla Firefox, are shifting power away from advertisers who create and control one-way marketing communication and giving it to consumers. Findings such as those reported here lend credence to the claims, from a growing chorus of voices, that the institution of advertising is imperiled (Garfi eld 2005; Jaffe 2005; Shultz 2005). Granted, many of these changes will not be felt overnight. Still, many are having very real impacts now. Either way, it may be time to develop a new defi nition of advertising, one that accom-modates user-generated content.

On the practical side, these fi ndings also have some obvi-ous implications for advertising managers. First, there are implications for the advertising of technology. Consumers and their social groups do not always accept the meanings and uses presented in advertising by the manufacturers of new technolo-gies. Sometimes, these products and their uses and meanings are subject to processes of deinscription and antiprogram (Akrich 1992; Akrich and Latour 1992), in which the intended uses and meanings are rejected and renegotiated. Despite the prevalence of these practices, no technology studies to date have explicitly looked at the role of consumer meaning-creation ac-tivities in deinscription and antiprogram activities. Most have focused on usage behavior (i.e., consumers using the product in novel and unintended ways). None have shown consumers actively creating advertising-like artifacts to counter the mean-ings suggested by the marketer. The Newton community not only deinscribed and antiprogrammed the Newton via their usage patterns but also created stories, images, and videos that supported and elaborated on these new usages. This research suggests that vigilante marketing can be an important site for these behaviors. Similar things may be happening with the consumer-generated content created by iPod fans (Ives 2004;

Kahney 2004b). iPod users have already created applications that extend those devices far beyond what Apple intended. Vigilante marketing may allow them to augment the meanings of the iPod to reinforce those extensions.

This research also underscores the importance of unique brand meanings suggested by previous research, but adds a new caveat. The importance of unique brand meanings may, at fi rst glance, seem obvious. However, it appears to be of such tremendous importance as to deserve deeper exploration. Consider the following brands: Jeep and Harley Davidson (McAlexander, Schouten, and Koening 2002), Macintosh and Saab (Belk and Tumbat 2002; Muñiz and O’Guinn 2001), Star Wars and Volkswagen (Brown, Kozinets, and Sherry 2003), and Xena: Warrior Princess (Schau and Muñiz 2002). All of these brands have unique and powerful meanings and all have strong, deeply devoted brand communities. In all of these communities, members occasionally take partial control of the brand to create idiosyncratic meanings beyond those suggested by the marketer. Now consider the brands for which we have seen vigilante marketing. They, too, have been characterized by unique brand meanings. Unique brand meanings are im-portant because they appear to offer consumers more space for supplemental meaning creation.

The Newton was afforded some powerful and unique mean-ings via the parent brand, Apple. These meanings had been a part of user-created, brand-promotional content since the earliest days of the community. Since being abandoned, the Apple Newton brand community has continually endeavored to create unique and compelling meanings, most of which go well beyond what Apple originally suggested. Most of the members we interviewed note that the community has done a better job of defi ning and elaborating the essence of the Newton brand than Apple did; they simply think the com-munity understands it better. This research suggests that not only are unique and powerful brand meanings a crucial part of the brand community; they may also play an important role in fostering vigilante marketing. When properly inspired and left to their own devices, brand enthusiasts will strive to create such strong and unique meanings. Clearly, this is what is happening in the iPod community. Members are building on the meanings offered by Apple in order to develop more idiosyncratic meanings.

This research also reinforces the importance of following the conversation about the brand that takes place among con-sumers. This research suggests that marketers should listen to and understand what their consumers are saying, particularly when those consumers are embedded in a brand community. This assertion seems commonsensical, and others have echoed this sentiment, saying there is still much to be learned from consumer-generated content (Garfi eld 2005; Morrissey 2005). This is not to say that the advertiser should blindly accept and follow the community’s wishes. However, when there are large

03 muniz.indd 198 7/3/2007 11:45:54 AM

Fall 2007 199

discrepancies between what the community believes about the brand (as expressed via consumer-generated content) and the way that the advertising is positioning the brand, then clearly something is wrong. Given the discrepancy between the way Apple positioned the Newton and the ways in which consumers used it, it appears that Apple could have obtained some useful ideas by listening to the community. At the very least, listening to the community could have helped Apple fi ne-tune their ads for the Newton. Given that users of a wide variety of products and services frequently use, innovate, and develop those offerings in novel ways and that these ways often become the standard (von Hippel 2005), this advice might be worth further consideration.

Apple appears to be aware of these possibilities and has not attempted to block or restrict any of the consumer-generated iPod content (Garfi eld 2005). Indeed, there is the distinct possibility that they are closely following the conversation in order to divine future advertising campaigns and product en-hancements (Meyers 2005). In a less technical realm, Jeep has followed a similar strategy and has been enormously successful. Jeep looked to its brand community and user-created brand content to create ads that resonated with the existing com-munity and appealed to potential Jeep drivers. For example, the successful 2002 Jeep advertising campaign, “Jenny,” was inspired by the Jeep brand community. “With a lot of Jeep owners there’s a certain saying and you’ll see it on Jeep bumper stickers—‘It’s a Jeep thing, you wouldn’t understand.’ A lot of ‘Jenny’ takes its inspiration from that” (Jeep brand manager Pearl Davies, quoted in Ferriss 2002). Jeep owners created content that expressed what the brand meant to them. This content was then distributed in bumper stickers, T-shirts, newsletters, and Web sites. Jeep recognized the appeal of this content and successfully leveraged it to promote the brand.

Taking this idea a step further offers another practical, though perhaps controversial, suggestion for advertisers: Give consumers the tools and encourage them to create advertising content for your brand. Our fi ndings suggest consumers are quite savvy in their understanding of the styles, tropes, logic, and grammar of advertising. Newton consumers demonstrate high levels of advertising literacy (Ritson and Elliott 1995) via their mastery of such advertising conventions as intertextuality (O’Donohoe 1997) and oppositional brand loyalty (Muñiz and Hamer 2001). Such advanced literacy is also evident in much of the vigilante marketing seen for other brands. This creative expertise should be leveraged. A few major consumer brands appear to have already taken this advice (Morrissey 2005). MasterCard created a Web site (www.priceless.com) that in-vited consumers to create copy to accompany two television commercials in their “Priceless” campaign and Converse used several consumer-generated commercials as part of their most recent television campaign (Bosman 2006). Both campaigns were generally considered successful.

Chevrolet, however, provides the most interesting example. Chevrolet gave consumers the tools (video clips, music, and customizable titles) to create video ads for the Chevy Tahoe that were then available for viewing on the Web (Neisser 2006). While some of the resulting ads were quite effective promotional messages, they were far from unanimously posi-tive (many were anti-SUV in tone). This example is noteworthy because it illustrates vividly both the opportunities and the challenges in giving consumers creative control. There are signifi cant risks as well as benefi ts. Still, some practitioners believe that even negative consumer-generated content has utility, as it offers valuable insight (New Media Age 2006). For their part, Chevrolet did not attempt to quell or remove any of the negative Tahoe content, claiming to have anticipated the possibility (Bosman 2006). Either way, consumer-generated content and vigilante marketing are not going to go away (Jaffee 2005). Advertisers should accept this fact and act ac-cordingly. The revolution won’t be televised. Instead, it will be expertly rendered and edited by dedicated users, and then distributed via e-mail and YouTube.

Finally, our research also provides suggestions for using ad-vertising to build or reinforce a strong brand community. Com-munities united by a central challenge appear to be stronger. The Newton brand community underscores the importance of such a tension. Advertisers may wish to create or emphasize a common challenge or source of tension via strong oppositional brand loyalty (Muñiz and O’Guinn 2001). Thus, advertisers may wish to stress an “us versus them” mentality. Coke and Pepsi do this, and it appears to be effective in generating and reinforcing their rivalry (Muñiz and Hamer 2001). A varia-tion on this strategy is to play up an underdog status. This is, after all, the exact type of tension that DDB touted in their famous VW Beetle campaign when they positioned the Bug relative to the larger, more stylish domestic cars of the day (Fox 1984). Volkswagen deployed a series of “us versus the rest of the market” messages and created a strong brand community around the Bug and VW. It should also be noted that this strategy has already been deployed in much of the vigilante marketing efforts for Firefox. Most of the advertising-relevant artifacts created by members of that community emphasize both the browser’s rivalry with Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and its underdog status.

Directions for Future Research

The realm of consumer-generated content represents an ex-tremely rich area for future research. There is much to be explored, as most of what is known is anecdotal. Outside of this paper, there have been no academic studies exploring this phenomenon. Potential topics include measuring consumer response (perhaps via instruments used to assess traditional advertising response), the impact of such consumer-generated

03 muniz.indd 199 7/3/2007 11:45:54 AM


content on received brand image, and strategies for reactions to consumer-generated content by advertisers. This data will be readily available as these processes continue to develop and spread. The brand community centered on the Mozilla Firefox Web browser is already encouraging an entire user-created promotional campaign. Undoubtedly, there will be increas-ing numbers of such examples. The realm of antibrand brand communities (Aron and Muñiz 2002; Hollenbeck and Zinkhan 2006) and vigilante marketing is also ripe for exploration. Consumers who dislike a particular brand can also mimic the conventions of that brand when creating antibrand content. Similarly, the role of consumer-generated content in user innova-tion (von Hippel 2005) is also open for future research. Vigilante marketing may play a role in both the perpetuation and promo-tion of this behavior. Finally, the intersection of advertising and the inscription and deinscription of technology goods may be a good area for future exploration, as many of these activities may play out in the realm of consumer-generated content.

NOTE

1. It should be noted that despite this prevailing belief in the community, outside analysts have identifi ed other causes for the Newton’s failure (Tesler 2001).

2. The Newton body is green, as is the backlight for the screen.

REFERENCES

Akrich, Madeline (1992), “The De-inscription of Technical Objects,” in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Wiebe Bijker and John Law, eds., Cambridge: MIT Press.

———, and Bruno Latour (1992), “A Summary of Convenient Vocabulary for the Semiotics of Human and Non-human Assemblies,” in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Wiebe Bijker and John Law, eds., Cambridge: MIT Press.

Alperstein, Neil M. (1990), “The Verbal Content of TV Ad-vertising and Its Circulation in Everyday Life,” Journal of Advertising, 19 (2), 15–22.

Aron, David, and Albert M. Muñiz, Jr. (2002), “Firing Back or Backfi ring: Antecedents and Desired Outcomes of Con-sumer-Created Brand Hate Sites,” paper presented at the 105th annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, September.

Atkins, Douglas (2004), The Culting of Brands, New York: Portfolio.

Bosman, Julie (2006), “Chevy Tries a Write-Your-Own-Ad Approach, and the Potshots Fly,” New York Times (April 4), B3.

Brown, Stephen, Robert V. Kozinets, and John F. Sherry, Jr. (2003), “Teaching Old Brands New Tricks: Retro Branding and the Revival of Brand Meaning,” Journal of Marketing, 67 (July), 19–33.

Cappo, Joe (2003), The Future of Advertising: New Media, New Clients, New Customers in a Post-Television Age, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Collins, Mark Anthony (1998), “Apple’s Ads Scorch Intel Bun-nies,” MacOpinion (March 26), available at www.macopinion.com/columns/macman/applead.htm (accessed May 1, 2002).

Cooper, Charles (1998), “A Bidder to Buy Apple’s New-ton?” ZDNet (April 1), www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/zdnn/0401/303400.html (accessed May 1, 2002).

Creswell, John W. (1998), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design; Choosing Among Five Traditions, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Davidson, Martin (1992), “Objects of Desire: How Advertising Works,” in The Consumerist Manifesto: Advertising in Postmod-ern Times, Martin Davidson, ed., London: Routledge.

Delaney, Tim (1995), “Identity and Community Through Sport Boosterism,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Denzin, Norman K. (1998), “The Art and Politics of Interpre-tation,” in Handbook of Qualitative Research, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds., Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, 500–515.

Ferriss, Paul (2002), “Jeep Rides with New Logo, Old Tag,” Marketing Magazine, 107 (no. 41).

Flight, Georgia (2005), “Companies Tap into Consumer Passion,” Business 2.0 (October).

Fox, S. (1984), The Mirror Makers: A History of American Advertis-ing, New York: Vintage.

Garfi eld, Bob (2005), “Listenomics,” Advertising Age, 76 (41).Halperin, Rhoda H. (1998), Practicing Community: Class, Culture

and Power in an Urban Neighborhood, Austin: University of Texas Press.

Hollenbeck, Candice R., and George M. Zinkhan (2006), “Con-sumer Activism on the Internet: The Role of Anti-brand Communities,” in Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 33, Cornelia Pechmann and Linda Price, eds., Provo, UT: As-sociation for Consumer Research, 1–7.

Hummon, David M. (1990), Commonplaces: Community Ideology and Identity in American Culture, Albany: State University of New York Press.

Hunter, Albert J., and Gerald D. Suttles (1972), “The Expanding Community of Limited Liability,” in The Social Construction of Communities, Gerald D. Suttles, ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 44–80.

Ives, Nat (2004), “Unauthorized Campaigns Used by Unauthor-ized Creators to Show Their Creativity Become a Trend,” New York Times (December 23), C3.

Jaffe, Joseph (2005), Life After the 30-Second Spot, Hoboken: John Wiley.

Janowitz, Morris (1952), The Community Press in an Urban Setting, Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Kahney, Leander (2002), “Apple ‘Switch’ Star Flies High,” Wired News (August 10), available at www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,54333,00.html (accessed June 1, 2004).

——— (2004a), “iPod Fans Get into the Picture,” Wired News (December 20), available at http://wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,66077,00.html (accessed June 1, 2005).

03 muniz.indd 200 7/3/2007 11:45:54 AM

Fall 2007 201

——— (2004b), “Home-Brew IPod Ad Opens Eyes,” Wired News (December 13), available at http://wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,66001,00.html (accessed June 1, 2005).

——— (2004c), “Fans Keep Newton in Motion,” Wired News (September 3), available at www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,64834,00.html (June 1, 2005).

Kates, Steven M. (2002), “Protean Quality of Subcultural Con-sumption: An Ethnographic Account of Gay Consumers,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (December), 383–399.

———, and Charlene Goh (2003), “Brand Morphing: Impli-cations for Advertising Theory and Practice,” Journal of Advertising, 32 (Spring), 59–68.

———, and Glenda Shaw-Garlock (1999), “A Study of Ideolo-gies and Discourses in Advertising to Women,” Journal of Advertising, 28 (Summer), 33–49.

Kephart, William M., and William W. Zellner (1994), Extraor-dinary Groups: An Examination of Unconventional Lifestyles, New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Kline, Ronald (2003), “Resisting Consumer Technology in Ru-ral America: The Telephone and Electrifi cation,” in How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technologies, Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch, eds., Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kozinets, Robert V. (2002), “The Field Behind the Screen: Using Netnography for Marketing Research in Online Communi-ties,” Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (1), 61–72.

Leigh, Thomas W., Cara Peters, and Jeremy Shelton (2006), “The Consumer Quest for Authenticity: The Multiplicity of Meanings Within the MG Subculture of Consumption,” Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 31 (4), 1–13.

McAlexander, James H., John W. Schouten, and Harold F. Koening (2002), “Building Brand Community,” Journal of Marketing, 66 (1), 38–54.

McCracken, Grant (1986), “Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (June), 71–84.

Merriam-Webster (2006), Online Dictionary, www.m-w.com/dic-tionary/vigilante (accessed May 23, 2006).

Meyers, Michelle (2005), “Problems Surfacing with iPod Nano Screen,” CNet (September 24), http://news.com.com/Problems+surfacing+with+iPod+Nano+screen/2100-1041_3-5880307.html (accessed July 1, 2006).

Mick, David Glen, and Claus Buhl (1992), “A Meaning-Based Model of Advertising Experiences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (December), 317–338.

———, and Susan Fournier (1998), “Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (September), 123–143.

Miles, Matthew B., and A. Michael Huberman (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, Terry L., Craig A. Boylstein, and Sandra Lorean (2001), “‘Doing’ Organizational Culture in the Saturn Corporation,” Organization Studies, 22 (1), 117–143.

Mitussis, Darryn, and Richard Elliott (1999), “Representations, Text and Practice: A Discourse-Analytic Model of the Consumer,” Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 26, Eric J.

Arnould and Linda M. Scott, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 312–319.

Morrissey, Brian (2005), “Handing Creative to the Masses,” Adweek, 46 (37), 10.

Motley, Carol M., Geraldine R. Henderson, and Stacey Menzel Baker (2003), “Exploring Collective Memories Associated with African-American Advertising Memorabilia,” Journal of Advertising, 32 (Spring), 47–57.

Muñiz, Albert M., Jr., and Lawrence O. Hamer (2001), “Us Versus Them: Oppositional Brand Loyalty and the Cola Wars,” in Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 28, Mary C. Gilly and Joan Meyers-Levy, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 355–361.

———, and Hope Jensen Schau (2005), “Religiosity in the Abandoned Apple Newton Brand Community,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (March), 737–747.

———, and Thomas C. O’Guinn (2001), “Brand Community,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (4), 412–432.

Neisser, Drew (2006), “The New Gold Rush: Viral Content,” Brandweek, 47 (15), 20.

New Media Age (2006), “Brand Reputation: Right to Reply,” New Media Age (April 13), 25.

O’Donohoe, Stephanie (1997), “Intertextuality and Young Adult Experiences of Advertising,” in Buy This Book: Studies in Advertising and Consumption, Mica Nava, Andrew Blake, Iain MacRury, and Barry Richards, eds., London: Routledge, 257–275.

O’Guinn, Thomas C. (2003), “(Brand) Community Support for the (Brand) Orchestra,” presentation to Marketing Science Institute Conference on Brands, Orlando, FL, December.

———, and Albert M. Muñiz, Jr. (2005), “Communal Con-sumption and the Brand,” in Inside Consumption: Frontiers of Research on Consumer Motives, Goals, and Desires, David Glen Mick and S. Ratneshwar, eds., New York: Routledge.

Otnes, Cele, and Linda M. Scott (1996), “Exploring the Interac-tion Between Ritual and Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 25 (Spring), 33–50.

Ritson, Mark, and Richard Elliott (1995), “Advertising Literacy and the Social Signifi cation of Cultural Meaning,” in European Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 2, Flemming Hansen, ed., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 113–117.

———, and ——— (1999), “The Social Uses of Advertising: An Ethnographic Study of Adolescent Ad Audiences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), 260–279.

———, ———, and Sue Eccles (1996), “Reframing Ikea: Commodity-Signs, Consumer Creativity and the Social/Self-Dialectic,” in Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 23, Kim P. Corfman and John G. Lynch Jr., eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 127–131.

Schau, Hope Jensen, and Mary C. Gilly (2003), “We Are What We Post? Self-Presentation in Personal Webspace,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (December), 385–404.

———, and Albert M. Muñiz, Jr. (2002), “Brand Communities and Personal Identities: Negotiations in Cyberspace,” in Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 29, Susan M. Broniarc-zyk and Kent Nakamoto, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 344–349.

03 muniz.indd 201 7/3/2007 11:45:54 AM


Shields, Vickie Rutledge, and Dawn Heinecken (2002), Measur-ing Up: How Advertising Affects Self-Image, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Shultz, Don E. (2005), Foreword to Life After the 30-Second Spot, by Joseph Jaffe, Hoboken: John Wiley.

Strauss, Anselm (1961), Images of the American City, New York: Free Press.

Tesler, Larry (2001), “Why the Apple Newton Failed,” TechTV (March 15), available at www.g4techtv.com/techtvvault/features/25271/Why_the_Apple_Newton_Failed.html (accessed May 1, 2002).

Von Hippel, Eric (2005), Democratizing Innovation, Cambridge: MIT Press.

Wagner, Mitch (1998), “Apple Newton Users Are Hopping Mad,” Internet Week (March 9), 46.

Wipperfurth, Alex (2005), Brand Hijack, New York: Portfolio.Wolcott, Harry F. (1994), Transforming Qualitative Data, Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.Zien, Karen Anne, and Sheldon A. Buckler (1997), “Dreams to

Market: Crafting a Culture of Innovation,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14, 4 (July), 274–287.

03 muniz.indd 202 7/3/2007 11:45:54 AM

Vigilante Marketing and Consumer Created Communications

Documents

Transcript of Vigilante Marketing and Consumer Created Communications