No Logo slash site.
March 24, 2001 11:38 AM   Subscribe

No Logo slash site. Naomi Klein's book has it's own site based on slashcode. New media for the anti-corporate masses :)
posted by kliuless (29 comments total)
We have to take the good (MeFi and it's format/style) with the bad (Klein's "NoLogo" site). Pretty ironic that her warped philosophy and message are allowed to spread thanks to the creations/inventions/efforts of the very corporations that she purports to loathe. Maybe her use of said technology will make her realize the error of her ways? Hey - we can hope.
posted by davidmsc at 11:46 AM on March 24, 2001

ha! davidmsc. protest all you want. you will be un-assimilated.

posted by rebeccablood at 12:01 PM on March 24, 2001

Don't hold your breath, David. Consistency is not a hallmark of the conspiracy theorists of the left.
posted by mw at 12:02 PM on March 24, 2001

Way to not get things, Dave. Maybe you should try reading her book, and you may end up sounding less foolish.
posted by Doug at 12:19 PM on March 24, 2001

Though a bit young for him, Naomi might consider dating Ralph Nader. They would have much to talk about.
posted by Postroad at 12:30 PM on March 24, 2001

i'm with doug, way to brand someone a conspiracy theorist, mw.
posted by kliuless at 12:38 PM on March 24, 2001

Self-contradiction of the month:

Funny how much money you can make by mocking money-making, really.
posted by frednorman at 1:00 PM on March 24, 2001

Postroad: Ms. Klein, if I'm not mistaken, is married to Avi Lewis, TV talk-show host and son of Stephen Lewis, former NDP leader (the NDP is the farthest left "mainstream" party in Canada).

kliuless: My understanding is that Ms. Klein believes that governments and big-business are in cahoots to impose things like free trade for purposes of eroding countries' sovereignty and that corporations are relentlessly and insidiously working their sinister presence into our lives (in schools, for example) through advertising, etc., and that they hold an especially pernicious form of power over us consumers as a result. If I am right about this, I stand by the label. If not, I'll be happy to be corrected.
posted by mw at 1:18 PM on March 24, 2001

I think the word "conspiracy" is a little strong. Take it out, and your above explanation reads like a Republican party platform statement.
posted by dhartung at 2:10 PM on March 24, 2001

This book is hinged on a simple hypothesis: that as more people discover the brand-name secrets of the giant logo web, their outrage will fuel the next big political movement, a vast wave of opposition squarely targeting transnational corporations . . .

-- from the introduction to No Logo.

"secrets of the giant logo web"? No, you're right, that doesn't sound like a conspiracy theorist at all.

Also, this:
...the financial crisis was a conspiracy orchestrated by corporate America to send Asian companies into bankruptcy, then buy their assets at fire-sale prices.

I think I pegged her pretty accurately.
posted by mw at 2:46 PM on March 24, 2001

frednorman: Self-contradiction of the month.

Also known as irony. The book is called No Logo, and yet it has a logo. Those crazy po-mo conspiracy nuts.
posted by ceiriog at 2:48 PM on March 24, 2001

the truth is out there....

posted by rebeccablood at 3:12 PM on March 24, 2001

davidmsc: Corporations didn't invent the Internet, and Slash is open source, so I'm not sure what your point is.

mw: This isn't about conspiracy per se, and Klein isn't conspiracy theorist. Read her book.

frednorman: You're missing the point. There's nothing wrong with anyone making a living, is there?
posted by tranquileye at 6:54 PM on March 24, 2001

The same people who think Klein is a left-wing conspiracy kook probably also think that Adam Smith thought capitalism was good thing. In both cases, it's obvious that they just haven't read them!
posted by muppetboy at 7:33 PM on March 24, 2001

Tranquileye: If you read v-e-r-y slowly, you'll note that I did not claim that corporations invented the internet. I know the whole story about DARPA, Cerf, Berners-Lee, etc, but it took Corporate America to invent the Web as we all know & love it. You know - the web that allows us to do things like MeFi, shop Amazon, read CNN, watch Shockwave, etc. Oh, and of course, the underlying stuff, too, like the software and backbone that we all use daily to embrace the Web. That's right - Corporate America, with all of the attending logos, profit-seeking, branding, and empire-building that goes with it. Ain't capitalism great?!
posted by davidmsc at 7:52 PM on March 24, 2001

Capitalism's grrrreat if you don't work 100-hour weeks for a handful of pennies. 'Course, what do we care about those poor saps, eh?
posted by Big Fat Tycoon at 8:20 PM on March 24, 2001

Hey Davidmsc, did you have to be so condescending and rude to tranquileye (who was actually being civil to you)? He clearly did read your post, even though it's pretty obvious you haven't read the book that ultimately inspired this thread. In fact, maybe you should go back and V-E-R-Y slowly read your original post, and we can all laugh at how silly it is together.
Those against "corporate America" aren't necessarily against corporations and what they produce, but the way in which those corporations currently operate, and affect lives and politics. There might be a contradiction if a No Logo tv show appeared on Must See TV, sponsored by Budweiser and The Gap, but that hasn't occurred.
posted by Doug at 10:25 PM on March 24, 2001

Now that is some wonky ass HTML code.
posted by artlung at 11:11 PM on March 24, 2001

Good to see the quality of debate on Mefi is improving...
posted by lagado at 11:22 PM on March 24, 2001

Doug: Do you believe Way to not get things, Dave. Maybe you should try reading her book, and you may end up sounding less foolish is not condescending and rude?
posted by mw at 1:27 AM on March 25, 2001

davidmsc, the US government funded the development of the Internet, and the research community funded the creation of the World Wide Web as a technology. These technologies where then turned over to private interests at essentially no cost, like the nice folks at Network Solutions who control the domain name registry.

I have no problem with people doing business and being in business, and that isn't what Klein is critiquing. Just one example:

As you probably know, there is a summit coming up in Quebec City in April to discuss a free trade agreement for most of the countries in North and South America. This agreement will impact all the citizens of the hemisphere, and it might well be signed at the summit. Wouldn't you like to be able to see the draft agreement, and to know what issues are being discussed? Rumour has it that there is no side agreement creating an environmental watchdog commission, as there is in NAFTA. Shouldn't we be allowed to know this, and make our opinions known to the government, before they agree to the treaty?
posted by tranquileye at 5:24 AM on March 25, 2001

i'm with doug again and tranquileye, solidaritat kameraden! i'm not so much worried about capitalism as its abuses. sure everyone needs to make a buck, but people and corporations need to be accountable for it at the same time. doing so at others' expense (US taxpayers included) isn't too cool, even if it is consistent :)

i'd point out OPIC, campaign contributions and IMF fiscal austerity programs... and that's just the tip of the iceberg!

i also like to think a better system can be designed, it just takes a little imagination.
posted by kliuless at 6:47 AM on March 25, 2001

No. You don't have to know. Love conquers all.
posted by Postroad at 6:48 AM on March 25, 2001

kliuless: A better system than we have now can be and has been designed. It's called capitalism.
posted by mw at 7:39 AM on March 25, 2001

There's nothing wrong with having a business and doing things to make that business prosper, so long as those decisions are morally and ethically responsible, and the company will take responsibility for its actions.

Many companies don't. They'll deny things, cover up things, and share nothing because a lot of the facts regarding things like sweatshops and exploitation of labor are bad PR! It'd be a PR nightmare. Since brand names and companies have become the next best thing to religion in America, these names and companies can't be mucked with.

No Logo seems to look to shatter those notions that companies are perfect - and although you might not have that viewpoint, many people are just ignorant to these things. The more people know, the better.

Postroad: No. You don't have to know. Love conquers all.

Remember, you can buy Love down at Walgreens for $2.99/box. :)
posted by hijinx at 8:15 AM on March 25, 2001

it took Corporate America to invent the Web as we all know & love it. You know - the web that allows us to do things like MeFi, shop Amazon, read CNN, watch Shockwave, etc. Oh, and of course, the underlying stuff, too, like the software and backbone that we all use daily to embrace the Web.

Let's see. My OS of choice is Linux. My browser of choice is Mozilla. I get my news from the BBC, a publically-funded corporation, and from the Guardian, which is backed by a non-profit trust. And the Net that I embrace is precisely that which evades the homogenisation and stagnation that comes when a corporate budget is attached to it. (Which is why I post to MeFi and not

No Logo's main point, if you hadn't noticed from reading it, is that transnational corporations aren't poster children for the unregulated free market: they manipulate regional disparities of wealth and earnings, engineer cartels, exploit underfunded public institutions for private benefit, and in general behave like total shits. At least the planned economies of the eastern bloc claimed to serve the people.
posted by holgate at 8:33 AM on March 25, 2001

I wonder what the marketing plan (and budget) for No Logo were, particularly the bit about viral marketing and setting up a website.
posted by johnny novak at 11:11 AM on March 25, 2001

For ye of littlef aith: someday you might own a multi-national corporation and then you will be more sympathetic to their needs.
posted by Postroad at 2:54 PM on March 25, 2001

Yes, MW, I was being rude and condescending. I'm a prick, really. Tranguileye, however, was actually discussing the issue pretty politely.
posted by Doug at 11:38 PM on March 25, 2001

« Older   |   Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments