One month prior to the riots I was in a takeaway food shop on Ridley
Road market, Dalston, just metres from where a hastily convened mob would later
storm the Kingsland shopping centre in an attempt to ransack its shops. For
lack of something to read while waiting for my fast food I perused a large pile
of glossy brochures for club nights stacked next to the till. I found myself
strangely fascinated by one in particular: ‘Ping Me Baby’, it read, is the
nightclub for blackberry owners:
ANYBODY WHO IS ANYBODY HAS A BLACKBERRY AND THEY SHOULD BE
AWARDED!!!!!! SO ON FRIDAY 22ND JULY PING ME BABY IS BACK WITH THE MASSIVE FREE
BLACKBERRY PARTY!!!! EVERYBODY WITH A BLACKBERRY IS 1000% FREE B4 11PM (£5
WITHOUT) .... THIS IS GUARANTEED TO BE A ROADBLOCK AFFAIR & IF YOU'RE
CELEBRATING ANYTHING GIVE US A CALL NOW FOR SOME GREAT DEALS. SEE YOU THERE!!!!
FREE B4 11PM WITH A BLACKBERRY OR £5 WITHOUT
The reason there is an independent club night dedicated to
Blackberry owners (rather than convened as a marketing strategy by the company)
is that there is a critical mass of users in central London and this group
constitutes a particular economic body. BBM is a free – unlimited – messaging
application and in this sense represents a ‘value’ option for mobile communication.
It allows users to send one-to-many messages to their network of contacts. This
is the equivalent of a fixed price buffet and, in a similar way, a cheap
industrially produced meal – of the sort that I was buying at the chicken shop
and which the attendees of Ping me Baby! eat too. It implies consumers of
lesser means. We know that Blackberry handsets are the smartphone of choice for
the majority of British teens – 37% according to an Ofcom study conducted in
same month as the unrest?1 During the riots we were informed that
the government was in frantic talks with the makers of Blackberry (RIM) about
limiting its service in order to restore public order. One wonders if they are
now taking the time to access their customer statistics in order to
understand which ‘public’ was acting.
Blackberry/BBM is a consumer choice that, as the existence of a club
night suggests, is a potential identity – one defined by the unlimited
satisfaction of a desire (to communicate by text) available to those with
limited financial means and the willingness to create a social network mediated
by a branded consumer apparatus. The club night worked in this manner: free
entry to a carnival space for Blackberry owners, pay to play for the rest. In
fact, the riots operated in a similar fashion. In material terms the closed
network of the BBM is what allowed mobs to come together almost instantaneously.
Yet, underlying/ subtending the radical social intensity of this phenomenon was
the functional logic of consumer-technological society – physically manifest in
the kind of phones in people’s pockets and present in their desires. Note, for instance,
the apparent Freudian-slip in the advertising text: the author probably means
to say that blackberry owners ‘should be rewarded’. Instead, the grammatical
structure indicates that blackberrys should be ‘awarded’ to people who already
own them! We need not be surprised that the rioters chose to loot electronic
goods instead of smashing banks.
After some research it became clear than the club night was named after a song by a contemporary urban/rnb singer. It’s not clear if he was employed by Blackberry to create the song, if he is courting them so they might licence his music, or if he is adopting a viral marketing strategy to piggyback off consumers' identification with their mobile phones. The lack of clarity on this issue is symptomatic of viral marketing – either its practice or its influence. This discovery seems to suggest that the advent of viral marketing has in some way brought about the birth of viral looting. The announcement that it would a ‘roadblock affair’ seems less hyperbolic than the marketers first intended.
'After some research': Google, or something a little harder? Also, you know what my book-lurnin's like: could you explain/expand 'structural violence of our economy'? Also 'radical social intensity' -- I think I know what you mean, of course, but would like to be absolutely certain.... I do think you're on to something here, anyway.
ReplyDelete