Alexa, Playholy By Justin Bieber

alexa, play “holy” by justin bieber

| cr. namuspromised |

thinking about in the soop jimin, sitting in bed holding his little spoon, half asleep and soft and precious 🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺

this is dangerous to have on my blog but I’m missing Jimin,so...

WHO ALLOWED THIS PARK JIMIN HOW DARE YOU WHAT THE FUCK

i’m in my vmin feelings & i’m taking you all with me 💘

| cr. @gimbapchefs |

+ bonus: jimin’s answer

Two of the few certainties we have in life:

Jimin and Jungkook will share a car;

One of them will complain about having to wait for the other to finally go home.

| cr. namuspromised & qdeoks |

I’ve always wondered if people realise how Hybe (I won’t say BTS but …) is manipulative in the content they release to keep fans engaged almost 24/7. Because they are! Obviously every brand can be manipulative to a certain extent. We are customers and they need to make money 😅 but some people really do seem naive. I don’t know if it’s because I’m a bit older than the average demographic and work in Marketing but yeah - sometimes it irks me the wrong yeah. I don’t want to start drama on your blog so no need to post this if you don’t want to 😉

Hi @lololypopy ! Thanks for the Ask. And it's okay; if someone wants to start drama that's on them. We're gonna have a mature discussion.

These days, many people view marketing as manipulative because marketing is about persuading consumers they need whatever what the brand is selling: a service or a product. But many times brands are really selling ideas and values, too, and this is the case with Hybe, BH and BTS. [Hybe is the parent company, while BH is the record label and the specific brand (end product) is BTS.]

INSEAD says that marketing should be influencing not manipulation. They want marketers to make this distinction more clear, too. Manipulation for them is the use of deception or underhanded tactics to influence consumer behavior instead of using facts. Basically, if a consumer wouldn't choose a brand if they knew the truth about important aspects of the product or brand, then that is manipulation in marketing. A prime example is when Volkswagen fooled its customers into thinking its cars were more green than they were. That level of deception is also criminal.

The reason people find BH's marketing tactics manipulative is because of the false reality and social media addiction they create through their content. Content is delivered near-daily, and sometimes several times per day. This creates constant engagement, addiction and reliance on the brand as part of their consumer's daily lives. The normal and healthy boundaries between brand/consumer and artist/fan are blurred. Participation in activities related to the band becomes almost compulsive (hello, here we all are on Tumblr... lol).

It also heightens an already intense para-social relationship between consumer and brand, where the consumer becomes an object of love and appreciation of the brand ideologically (such as MOA or ARMY), which intensifies brand loyalty. There is a false sense of reciprocation there, and it is driven further through certain narratives. Being labelled as ARMY strips consumers of their identity, too. We become an unknowable collective instead of indivudals withour own needs and values. This is rather cultish, but that's a post for a different day. :D

In this type of setup, fans are made to believe they must act to defend the brand and help the brand achieve its vision. The brand's vision becomes the consumer's vision, which is genius or diabolical, depending on how you look at it.

A lot of people believe that the marketing narrative of BTS in particular was constructed well before their debut. They were setup to be the loveable underdogs that would appeal to a western market where a rags to riches story is universally loved. Do I believe this? Honestly, I don't know because it seems slightly over the top and maniacal. Like, a little too Hank Scorpio to me. But there are a couple things that leave me wondering.

One of the interesting facets of this argument is that I haven't come across any hardships BTS faced that other groups didn't also face. Their company being new and the group not being taken seriously is par for the course and lots of other groups have been through the same and were not successful. Being cut from a show at the last minute is also routine in show business. However, I imagine there are things I don't know about, so feel free to share what you know in the comments but please do so respectfully. This is an adult discussion, not fan wars, etc.

Another reason that this strategy could have been in place from the get-go is because it seems to still be in place despite incredible success. The underdog narrative is difficult to sustain in the face of success, which is perhaps ironic. Conan O'Brien is probably a great example of this. His schtick on Late Night was based around being the underdog with the low budget and the bad/weird ideas. This did not translate well to The Tonight Show, nor did any attempt to retool his persona/schtick.

Recently, there was gratitude expressed by BTS for the protection that ARMY gave the group. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with this because it furthers an unhealthy para-social realtionship that is truly unbalanced. It creates a drive for recommitment to fan labor (streaming, posting, reporting, etc), which of course the group relies on for their outstanding numbers when it comes to views, likes, streams, and ultimately record sales. It was RM who made the comment, and I was really surprised to hear it. And, as ever, it's about the way things are said. Fans should be encouraged to speak out against racism and other prejudice the group ecounters, but the idea that there is a specific protection that only the fans can give is disingenous because the vagueness of the comment can be misinterpreted to support the wealth of fan labour. Basically, it furthers radical commitment to the brand.

Now, don't come at me in the comments because I haven't said I believe this theory. It is one perspective and I do think it has valid points, but that doesn't mean it's true. Circling back to the heart of our topic, this is what I would ask: If you found out any of the following were true, how would you feel about the brand BTS? Would you still feel like supporting it, or would you feel lied to or otherwise deceived? (Keep in mind that I'm not saying these things are true AT ALL; this is a thinking exercise. Got it?)

none of the group live together (you could argue this lie provides privacy but it also creates a false reality)

they aren't all great friends

there were no hardships faced by the group that others of the same or previous generations didn't also face

they had plenty of food and ate out often, even during pre-debut (this is an interesting one because many ARMY circulate the idea that they could barely afford to live)

all of the money challenges in reality and variety programmes that made it seem like someone wouldn't eat or otherwise would suffer were fake (this is 99% likely, btw)

the group actually had opportunities that others didn't

the group has had an autonomy and freedom that other groups have never had, giving rise to more opportunities

Share your thoughts! Do you think BH and Hybe market their brands ethically? Do you ever feel manipulated? Why or why not?