LO 1.

EMPOWERED CONSUMERS
The digital environment and the intelligence revolution have not only changed the practice of marketing, they have
changed the balance of power. Where marketers once had power over consumers, sending one-way messages
through mass media, now consumers have the power to talk back, to share their opinions with others and even
change other consumers’ minds about the content of the message and the value of the brand.

In today’s marketplace, the power is shifting from marketers to consumers. This is because of the internet, which
has been described as ‘the most powerful instrument yet devised for the actualisation of consumer power’.30 And
we consumers have put it to good use.

Consumer empowerment theory

In 2006, Denegri-Knott explored consumer power in the online environment, developing a typology of four
consumer power strategies.31 The first was control over the relationship, where consumers control whether or not
they engage with brands online. The second power type was information as power—a valuable commodity online.
Consumers seek and share information, communicating opinions and product experiences, and even try to
persuade others to change their views.32 The third power strategy is aggregation, where consumers come together
online to form a community of like-minded people or to advocate for an issue. The final power strategy is
participation. With the internet being described as anti-hierarchical, anyone can log on for instant and universal
access to a platform for their creativity.33

Some Australian academics (in fact, three of the authors of this book) and their British colleagues tested Denegri-
Knott’s typology in the blogosphere, using the controversial Tourism Australia campaign, Where the Bloody Hell
are you? as their stimulus. They found that bloggers were empowered to circumvent the traditional self-regulatory
system, by distributing information, forming hubs of like-minded people and even participating and creating their
own spoof ads. So in addition to confirming Denegri-Knott’s four power types, Kerr et al. (2012) also added a fifth
type of consumer power34—self-liberation. This is the power to express an opinion, to have a voice or, even, to
vent.

Therefore, consumer empowerment online theory suggests there are five consumer power strategies in the
online environment. These are: (1) the power to opt in or out; (2) information as power; (3) the power of joining
together or aggregation; (4) the power to participate; and (5) self-liberation as a powerful driver.

Page 15

Opportunities versus risks

According to recent research from We Are Social (2018), 58% of Australians believe that new technologies offer
35
more opportunities than risks. Most of us, 55%, prefer to complete tasks digitally whenever possible. Yet 89% of
us still believe that data privacy and protection are very important. In saying that, only 39% of us bother to delete
cookies from our internet browser to protect our privacy and just over a third (36%) of us use an ad blocker. So
maybe we don’t see so many risks. Or we see the risks but just can’t be bothered.

Or maybe it’s because of our SoLoMoVo mindset. You see, the digital world has made us more social, because we
are constantly connected and part of a community. We are also local. We connect with local digital content and
local retailers, and increasingly transact online. We are mobile, with multiple devices, screens, browsers and apps.
And we like video, because rich media entertains and informs us. And that means we spend a lot of time online.
The 2018 Nielsen Digital Ratings showed that ever week Australians aged 18–24 spent 85.15 hours online, ages
25–34 spent 98.16 hours, ages 35–49 spent 87.09 hours and those over 50 spent 70.57 hours.36

But that doesn’t mean we would risk abandoning traditional media. As Nielsen suggests, ‘Not only do we watch
more than three hours of “traditional” TV a day—a level that hasn’t changed over the past five years’—but internet-
enabled TVs and mobile devices provide more opportunity to consume TV and other video content than ever
before.’ So we’re still watching TV, just on many, more opportune screens and perhaps not in real time.

Similarly, it does not mean we are using social media in the same way as we used to (even last year). The 2018
Deloitte Media Consumer Survey reported signs of dissatisfaction with social media, with 59% of us using social
media daily, down from 61% the previous year.37 And almost one-third (31%) of us are thinking of ‘taking a break’
from social media. A good time to read your textbook.

We are no longer ‘ordinary Australians’

Not that any of us really aspires to be ordinary, but ‘ordinary Australian’ is a description of what the typical
Australian is like, based on the most common responses to the previous census. In 2012, these included factors
such as British ancestry, born in Australia, both parents being Australian and speaking only English at home. This
home was a freestanding three-bedroom house, owned with a mortgage and a garage for two motor vehicles. The
ordinary Australian was married with two children and identified as Christian.38

But the most recent 2016 census revealed that ‘ordinary Australian’ no longer exists. In fact, out of a population of
almost 26 million Australians, only 6000 people could be considered ‘ordinary’ as per the 2012 census. More than
a quarter of Australians (26%) were born overseas. One third of us in Sydney and Melbourne don’t speak English
at home. Same-sex couples have risen by 39%. And of the 6.1 million Australian families, less than half (44.7%) are
couples with children. Have a look at Figure 1.5 to see who we are.
Figure 1.5 We are anything but ordinary

Marketers cannot make any assumptions based on ordinary Australians. That is just marketers being Page 16
ordinary.

And if you want to know how ordinary you are, you can find out. I am 83% ordinary. But do the quiz and you can
find out how ordinary an Australian you are: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-05/are-you-an-ordinary-austr
alian-census-quiz/8776272

The idea of what it means to be Australian is at the heart of a new campaign by Vegemite, which captures the iconic
faces and quirky moments of our nation’s history. It spreads the love from Pauline Hanson’s ‘Please Explain’ to the
first female Prime Minister, from the Big Prawn to Skippy the Bush Kangaroo (see Exhibit 1.6 ). Thinkerbell co-
founder Adam Ferrier says, ‘The Tastes Like Australia campaign is topical, thought-provoking and aims to
promote a discussion about national pride, difference and unity. And while the intent of the campaign is clear, a
true celebration and embrace of our unique nation and Vegemite, there is no doubt the interpretation of the
creative elements could spark some heated discussions.’39
Exhibit 1.6 Tastes like Australia
Source: With permission of Thinkerbell and Vegemite

Second digital generation

Does your mother ever ask you to fix something on her phone? Then she is probably not a digital native. You see,
different generational responses to technology have been well researched in the literature. It is generally thought
that the youngest generations are more innately technology-savvy than digital immigrants (often their parents),
who had to learn these skills (Prensky, 2001).40 If we are born with new technologies, we have more familiarity
and less fear of them and perhaps even take them more for granted.

More recently, Fortunati, Taipale and de Luca (2017) conceptualised the idea of two digital generations.41 The first
digital generation were born in the late 1970s and early 1980s. They grew up with a sense of enthusiasm and
wonder of the digital technology that had changed their school, their workplace and their lives.

The second digital generation were born in the second half of the 1980s and the 1990s, when digital technologies
began their mass diffusion. Because they had fewer siblings, more years in education, and parents who saw
themselves as their friends, they became more socially and economically dependent on their parents, creating the
‘infantilisation’ of the second digital generation.

And contrary to earlier thinking, despite having grown up with digital technology, and even displaying a taken-for-
granted attitude towards it, the second digital generation are actually less equipped and skilful in using digital
technologies than their predecessors.

This is because they do not have to be. Interfaces are now more intuitive, and greater similarities across platforms
means the acquisition of higher-proficiency ICT skills is not as essential as it was for the first digital generation.
Further, the needs of the second generation are better gratified by adopting the technology that is most convenient
and beneficial to their life, such as social media, suggesting that they may lack the same interest and immersion in
digital technologies as adolescents in the late 1990s.

The changes in our behaviour, our adoption of technology, and even our backgrounds have also changed society.