It's not really so crazy that people vote with their clicks. Our interactions with others have always been about making split-second decisions. For sighted people, a lot of if not most of the cues that subtly prompt us to make these reductive binary decisions are visual: the way someone presents him or herself. At least that’s what happens when we're making decisions more or less on our own. In a group setting (and the internet is the group setting par excellence), things get more complicated because of social proof, influence, peer pressure, whatever you want to call it. It’s nothing new. Social influence has been around for, like, ever. Why? Because most people are effing sheep and they hesitate, or don’t know how, to think for themselves. I agree with you that it’s completely emotional, rarely rational. But why couldn’t a visual mark, a logo, which is always rhetorical, play a strong suasive role in what you are calling the vote economy?]]>
For the most part, I don't purchase anything without checking out the competition online. Aesthetics are important to me, but I'd happily buy from a “plain Jane-looking” company on the back of some nice word-of-mouth marketing.
I don't know so much about how things used to be done, but it seems foolish to think that an identity-change can alter an organisation's fortunes.
Change needs to come from within.]]>