PBR as a model for TEC
Yesterday afternoon as I was driving home from the clericus gathering in Magnolia I caught a piece of a segment on NPR’s Marketplace. Rob Walker, author of Buying In: The Secret Dialogue Between What We Buy and Who We Are (Amazon) told the story of Pabst Blue Ribbon (PBR) beer and its surprising recent bounce back in the beer market. As I listened to the story, I couldn’t help but think of the Episcopal Church (TEC) that I am a part of and wondering if there might be some parallels.
PBR was a beer that had, at one point in time, a decent share of the beverage market in the US. But a slow, steady decline in sales over a number years made PBR irrelevant as the Budwheisers, Coors, and Miller’s of the world out advertised all their competitors. PBR was relegated to the margins of the market. Then a funny thing happened. Microbrews elevated in popularity, partly as a response to the dominance of the major beers that were being sold to American’s on their TV and Radio signals. Microbrews are known for having more flavor than the typical Bud or Miller High Life (apologies to my friend Matt) but also for being a local brew. You would think that this added layer would completely cripple a beer like PBR, which is now competing against the popularity and flavor of the microbrew and the big money companies out of Colorado and St. Louis.
But this is what nobody expected, especially the folks at PBR, young people in Portland, OR revolted against the kitchiness of and expensive microbrew and the slick advertising of the big beer companies. These young people turned to PBR as their beer of choice in protest to high prices and big money advertising. PBR became the “anti-brand” brand beer. This fascinating phenomenon has spread up to Seattle and around the Pacific NW and possibly to other parts of the country. The result is that PBR’s sales have spiked dramatically and they are now a force in the market again. But why PBR? Why not Icehouse or some other marginal, cheap beer? PBR is made in Portland. For the young people of Portland to revolt, PBR was the perfect choice because it was local and affordable and it was anti-advertising.
So, what does PBR do now? They didn’t cause this to happen. This phenomena happened to them and they needed to understand what happened and catch the wave themselves. PBR is now being served in kitchy gastropubs all around Portland and Seattle as an alternative tap alongside the heavier and more expensive microbrews. Should PBR advertise now that it is competitive again. Or should they do nothing and ride the wave as long and as far as it will carry them? I becomes a very complex question for marketing, which is why the man on NPR says he calls this phenomena “merketing” because it is merky in terms of who is actually in control. Does PBR have any agency in their own product? This kind of merketing seems to have a significant connections with a world dominated by Facebook, Twitter, and Wikipedia. We are becoming more in control of the news and of the information humanity needs to know.
So what does this have to do with the Episcopal Church (or any other mainline denomination)? It seems a similar trajectory to PBR has been taken. Once a proud tradition with a major voice in the public square, TEC has seen steady decline over a number of years. The mainliners, especially those left of center, have been beaten out of the public sector by the Evangelicals and Fundamentalists in ways not too unlike the Coors, Millers, and Budwheiser’s. Slick advertising, a lot of money, and simple but powerful message has given the Evangelicals and Fundamentalists the largest share of the church ‘market.’ But then a funny thing has happened.
Some Evangelicals have gotten tired of the game. And just like the curious case of PBR, the Episcopal church is seeing a small wave of people who are fleeing their Evangelical (and even Roman Catholic backgrounds) many of whom are women who feel called to vocational ministry. Has the Episcopal church become the “anti-church” church? It certainly did for me. What is the Episcopal response going to be? Brian McClaren has gone as far as to say this moment in history is an “Episcopal moment.” To be the “anti-brand” is a powerful place to hold, but it is also tricky to know how to move forward, especially in the midst of current challenges of folks splitting away from the church over political and theological issues.
So how similar is our story to that of PBR? I think there are many parallels, but so far PBR has rode the wave and allowed a kind of grassroots movement take them forward. Will the Episcopal church have room for that kind of grassroots movement to rise up? So far, I haven’t found much hope that it will, but that doesn’t mean I, and others, aren’t trying.
Unfortunately PBR’s non-commercial image rapidly became just that, an image. One that now apparently is worth enough to the hipster set that it costs $5 for a bottle of PBR in Williamsburg. I think that anyone from our generation never really learned how to cultivate a meaningful and personal identity and instead only learned how to consume an image, a shallow identity. Even a non-image like PBR’s brand rapidly becomes consumable.
For me I think this means we have to stop thinking our own image as we approach others and instead simply ask them Who they are? For most, just being asked will be a first. Then comes the hard part, how to keep them while they go through the uneasy process of actually discerning their own identities. It becomes so easy to give that project up and go back to the pretty pre-packaged identities we can literally go buy at the Wal-mart or the thrift store.
PBR’s “no-marketing” thing was actually a marketing thing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/22/magazine/the-marketing-of-no-marketing.html
David thanks for your words of caution and challenge. Every brand is an image. Every person has an image, in fact we are created that way. I don’t think the imaging is a problem, but more about where it goes. PBR had an image for a long time, one that saw its sales plummet over time. Then a new image emerged, one that it did not expect. This is what I am interested in because I see the same thing happening to the Episcopal church. A new image is being thrust upon TEC and I’m curious as to where we’ll go with it. Ten years ago people like you and me were not coming to the Episcopal church and now we are. I’m not saying we’re flocking or that TEC is going to grow the way PBR has done. In fact I think we should avoid some of what has happened to PBR in response to their “anti-brand” image.
Ms. Rev. Thanks for the article, this is a much lengthier discussion than the blurb I heard on NPR. It shows exactly what I was trying highlight. PBR had to create a marketing ploy in response to the marketing that was happening under their noses. It is just fascinating to me. I love the idea of resisting to market as a marketing scheme. I love the quote, ”let the consumer lead the brand.” I wonder if the church will follow suit or if we will continue to feed off of the power base within our system.