• by Lydia Loizides , Op-Ed Contributor, May 30, 2007

Obviously, pretty deep. I am referring to an article that appeared in today’s New York Times,  “Is Wal-Mart Too Cheap For Its Own Good?”   You see, while the article may be all about how Wal-Mart is having a tough time breaking out of the low-cost, low-end market, the bigger-picture message is this: not only is the report likely right on the money from a brand equity point of view, it was leaked to the mainstream press via an online property, wakeupwalmart.com. Technology and consumers are playing a very large role in how the brand is able to transition from a world that was, by all accounts, fundamentally different 40 years ago, to one today where all media are interconnected to within two degrees of separation (if you are lucky).

So why harp on Wal-Mart? Because it’s simply another case in point where technology is playing a role in how a brand’s evolution is now so complex that discounting the effects of technology as a messenger and a facilitator of messages, quite literally is brand suicide. 

Another case in point: Chevrolet and Tahoe.

MSN recently announced that Chevrolet will be the first global sponsor of LiveEarth.msn.com. Why do I find this somewhat ironic? Well, for those who missed it (and I am not sure how you could have) less than a year ago, Chevrolet embarked on an ill-fated user-generated campaign that became the template for how not to use technology as part of an overall communications plan.  The nut and bolts of it went something like this: consumers were invited to create a Tahoe ad. So what they came up with wasn’t what Chevrolet expected (examples can be found here). I took a look at the other relevant and related videos on YouTube that came up in my search, and of the 29 instances that I could find of Tahoe related user-generated commercials, three not-so-kind commercials generated more than 200,000 views alone. Now, fast-forward to the MSN announcement -- do you see the irony here? Do yourself a favor and do a search about Chevrolet and LiveEarth and see what the public is/is not saying about the move.

All I am trying to say is this: regardless of who or how “big” you are, or how successful you have been in the past, there has been a fundamental shift in who, how and what becomes important to consumers as they develop, refine and evaluate their relationships with brands.  Agree or disagree? You tell me.