I don't understand people's attachment to corporations and brands.
I really don't.
Like say Company X has been making something, maybe it's corn chips. And people get attached to corn chips. And when they start making something else, like toilet plungers, some folks start screaming bloody murder because it somehow it pollutes the corn chips. And they could just not buy the toilet plungers, because it doesn't change the availability of corn chips on the market.
Or consider Company Y has been lately producing products that aren't good. And then people start saying; "They should die a horrible death," ignoring that living breathing people depend on the auspices and aegis of Company Y to provide for themselves.
Maybe Company Z has been slowly changing the type of service they've been producing over time, and now folks aren't happy because they're not getting the exact kind of service.
For the latter I can understand somewhat, if Company Z stood for Zebras as in they sold zebras, then they started selling giraffes and donkeys and horses and now you can't get zebras anymore, which is dumb because "Zebras" is right in their name. And my issue isn't that I can't get zebras, it's that it's misleading.
It's just so baffling to me. How much power do these entities have over you? And why?
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Like, I think it's cool when a company or otherwise a group of individuals consistently put out good work, whatever that work might be, and I think that a similar group doing unethical things is bad.
That is about the extent of any company loyalty I've ever had.
To give an example, people assume that I'm a Pepsi person. The only reason I buy Pepsi is because the local supermarket doesn't stock Coca-Cola. I don't have a strong preference on the matter, I just buy what's there because I like cola.
To literalize your abstractions a bit. A company that sold exclusively corn chips and plungers would be a bit odd.
Those people are just assholes. Like, there's not a deeper reasoning there.
I feel like most people grow out of that kind of phase, but a lot of them don't.
We put together general impressions of the way things are and similarly general impressions of how much we like the way things are, and when things challenge the way things are for things we like, we sometimes feel threatened by the lack of stability, so we complain about it.
It's one of those things that doesn't make much sense if you think about it, but it feels so intuitive.
Company reputation is, functionally, a quick judgement call as to what kind of actions you expect it to take in the future. Obviously, you'd prefer it to do something you'd like. And especially if you've grown fond of a company, you start to care a lot about what it does.
It's also difficult (read, impossible if we go really deep) to think through all the ramifications of a decision or action, so it's just much easier to not really bother with the consequences.
i guess because if my experience with something has been a net positive, i expect future experiences with it to also be positive?
not so much anymore, now that i'm older i can see how irrational that is (i tend to overly-idealize musicians, writers and specific TV series now, instead)
might have the same basis, maybe
Did they make Babe or did they give some folks money to make Babe?
although admittedly that was in part because for a long time i thought Universal was the same as the BBFC rating U (i was very young at the time, and hadn't encountered the word 'universal' in any other context)
Batman logic.
though that was amusing
unfortunately it seems to be a reference, rather than following the original pattern and creating something original. though i guess there really isn't a pattern here other than simply insane troll logic.
Here I usually only see ECNALUBMA given that treatment for some reason
what did Erif do wrong?
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis