The idea that a group of people is more likely to socialize is based on the idea that they use the same brand of product that has always been around. Whether they are a group of Porsche owners meeting every Sunday morning or Mary Kay parties every Thursday night, here I call them customer communities. Today it exists in a virutally connected world and this is where "branding" intersects with "social networks". These community members place special emphasis on certain types of consumption as part of a celebration, ritual, or tradition. These brands have certain communal elements. Schouten and McAlexander’s ethnographic study of new bikers uncovered a subculture of consumption involving Harley motorcycle riders. Their work shows how Harley riders derive an important part of their understanding of the brand from the connection they share with one another. Yet, this understanding goes much further, to an actual way of life, or what they properly call subculture.
These kinds of subcultures have a lot of similarities with brand communities (shared ethos, status hierarchies etc.), but important differences as well. The same can be applied to Apple users, BMW lovers or simple those who are carrying a "I'm not a plastic bag" bag.
Brands such as Starbucks, Harley Davidson, Apple, Prada, Mario (Nintendo), Rolex and Oprah are so powerful in comparison to a religious icon, around which an entire ideology of consumption is developed and articulated around. Professor Holt's (Harvard) work applies a structuralist analysis that describes a brand with a socially fixed meaning. Consumers see brand communities having an active interpretive function, with brand meanings being socially negotiated, rather than delivered unaltered and to from context to context, consumer to consumer. This is very interesting when you start thinking about what's going on in Facebook or MySpace.
Social networks represent a relatively new form of customer community. They are communities bound together most frequently by shared interests, such passion or share meanings. Even online, there are rituals and traditions typically center on shared experiences (not necessarily consumption) with the brand or multiple brands. My observations are that the majority of all brand communities encountered some form of ritual or tradition. Through these rituals come “meanings” and these “meanings” are what different a true brand that stands for something versus a brand that is being known across the world or being used but do not go beyond their utility. It was interesting reading on the thread today on global brands when Bart and others were debating the difference between Twitter, Facebook and the Coca Cola and Nike of the world. Hope this provide some context.
