As a technology major, the idea of planned obsolescence is something that always struck my interest. From one perspective, it is a truly brilliant marketing scheme. Take technology, something that is all ready growing at an immense pace, and build devices that can only keep up for so long. This forces pressure on consumers to be in constant need of an upgrade, thus spending more money and allowing technology companies to flourish. I believe most users are aware of some of the growth trends of technology. I mean, why else would they be buying new computers every couple of months if they didn't realize this (I hope that not everyone simply takes what Microsoft and Hewlett Packard says as gospel). However, I do not think they realize how badly they are being suckered by these manufactures.
This is the point at which I admit that I worked in retail selling computers for four years and was more or less convincing people every day that their relatively recent computers were totally obsolete. At the same time I had a desktop computer that was five years old then (and close to 8 years now, I still use it) running fine with only a few small upgrades to the RAM and sound card. This ultimately took a huge toll on my conscience and I just couldn't do it anymore. It was probably the push to sell uselessly expensive warranties based on a pitch of lies that really put me over the edge. That which has no soul, surely should pursue a career in sales. So that's kind of a summation of my personal experience with planned obsolescence. With that being said, there were some things mentioned in Giles Slade's book Made to Break that just didn't even cross my mind.
Early in the book, Slade discusses a few points about early product marketing and development that led up to the idea of planned obsolescence. The first topic mentioned was the over the top branding that companies started utilizing. One of Slade's examples is Swinger sewing machines. They didn't want people to refer to their product as their 'sewing machine' but rather their 'Swinger'. So they slapped a huge logo of their name across the top. Soon every manufacture was creating clever ways to design or package their product to catch the eyes of consumers. This not only made their products nice and pretty, but started a new trend of brand loyalty where consumers developed trust that they would get the same quality product from a company no matter where the product was purchased.
At this point, companies that created expendable goods such as food products, soaps, and things alike were benefiting greatly. People had bought into their product and since these things run out, chances were they would buy them again the next time. But what about products that aren't expendable? With proper maintenance there are some things that could last a lifetime. The previously mentioned sewing machine for example. Well this is where the idea of annual model changes and probably the very first instance of planned obsolescence comes into play. Companies started creating a new line of products every year claiming to have more than last years model. Needless to say, people got hooked. These companies convinced consumers that it was important to stay ahead of the curve and own all the latest products. So back to the sewing machine example. You could purchase one sewing machine and probably keep it throughout several generations of upgraded sewing machines before your actually NEED another one, but the desire to have something new is an overwhelming sensation for some.
This idea carried over well into the age of computers, were obsolescence became a key marketing strategy. Somewhere along the lines there was someone that decided people were getting wise to the fact that they did not need a new product every year. Companies were losing money due to unsuccessful product 'improvements' that just were not as good as the previous generations. The solution was to start creating products that were made to only last a certain amount of time. This is undoubtedly where the title of Slade's book came from.
A Note on Ethics:
The idea of planned obsolescence is surrounded by a nasty air of deteriorating ethical standards. Major technology companies are kind of playing their consumers for saps by telling them that the products they put so much confidence in previously are no longer good now that the consumer all ready owns it and a new product is available. I get that these companies need to make money and I also get that new products need to come out in order for technology to advance, but there is a limit and I feel that more often than not this limit is tested. On a final note, Slade also mentions how the discarding of obsolete technology is having a negative effect on the environment. Of the millions of technology devices that get thrown out each year, and incredibly small percentage of them get recycled, Most end up eating away at the earth in dumps. Just another thing to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment