November 18, 2013
In one way, Goldman Sachs is rather unlucky. Because of the massive profit they made from the 2008 financial collapse, the public has a generally negative view of their organization. Goldman Sachs is part of a sort of "Axis of Evil" in Citigroup, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and other financial institutions that the public blames for the Great Recession. In fact, people dislike Goldman Sachs so much that the name alone is infamous enough to turn people away from them. Indeed, I laughed out loud when I saw a Goldman Sachs commercial recently, the extended version of which is above. They claimed to be stimulating the economy, investing in small businesses, and helping the same normal people who they screwed just a few years before. It is clear that Goldman Sachs has a lot of work to do.
But they are doing it. They've ran commercials very much like this one in several places, trying to cultivate a positive reputation. They use stock phrases, much like a politician running for office, like "building the economy," "creating new jobs," and even just "small businesses." The connotation of these words is decidedly positive, but what do they actually mean? Not much, really. Goldman Sachs does not deign to explain how or where they are "building the economy," or how their programs help to reach that goal. Nevertheless, that phrase is quite effective in connecting with a public weary of a protracted economic recovery.
To "create new jobs" is straightforward enough, but through repetition by politicians and corporations alike, that phrase has reached the state of a holy motto, a mantra of our political and economic system. Do you want to be elected to Congress, your state legislature, your city council, or your local school board? Promise to create jobs. Are you a large private equity firm who wants people to like you? Say you create jobs. Is the claim true? Maybe. Does it matter? No, not really. Promising to create jobs is reification at its finest. The phrase has taken on a life of its own, to the point where it doesn't matter, in the short run, how or when jobs will be created, so long as someone says they will be.
The most significant use of language to beguile in this video is the phrase "small businesses."While this phrase is used often in politics and advertisement, its actual meaning is rather vague. What is a small business? Is it a business that is even marginally smaller than Goldman Sachs? Or is it your neighborhood coffee shop? Perhaps it is a business that has a few branches in a small locality, or a business that has many branches in a small locality, or a business that has a few branches in a large region. Is gross income a factor? What about net income? Number of customers? Maybe a small business is all of these things. In terms of the advertisement, what matters is how the consumer views a small business. Goldman Sachs wants to project the image of the "neighborhood coffee shop" small business. People from your community, local entrepreneurs creating jobs and stimulating your local economy in Small Town, USA. That image makes us like Goldman Sachs, those great job-creating, economy-building patriots. Regardless of whether that image is true, it improves their public image.
Goldman Sachs' advertising executives have been working hard. They have come up with a catch program title, something that they can advertise so that they can carry on whatever they do out of the public eye. A simple visit to their website shows their effort. Today's front page shows how Goldman Sachs is helping British small businesses (that's a key phrase) succeed and the Philippines recover from their natural disaster. Their mission statement is one long, rambling euphemism for "private equity firm," which has a negative connotation. They are using language to shape how we think. Whether it is misleading or not, Goldman Sachs is influencing the way we perceive their company. Is it working? Are people actually beginning to favor Goldman Sachs? I certainly have not seen any sign of that, but it could begin to happen. Only time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment