The promotional regime of visibility: Ambivalence and contradiction in strategies of dominance and resistance

Abstract

In this article, we explore the tensions and blurred boundaries between dominance and resistance in promotional contexts by critically examining the notion of ‘visibility’, a commonly used yet largely unproblematised concept within the field of promotion. More specifically, we argue that contemporary promotional industries sustain and perpetuate a post-panoptical ‘regime of visibility’ underpinned by three modalities: (1) visibility as recognition, which associates being watched with empowerment while downplaying it as surveillance; (2) visibility as transient, which stresses visibility as a scarce resource that requires continuous work; and (3) and visibility as an end-goal, that is, as an end in itself rather than means to achieve something else. Acknowledging the existence of this regime opens up avenues for a productive analysis of the coexistence and mutual constitution of dominance and resistance within promotion in the digitalised communication environment, beyond debates about ‘authenticity’ or ‘woke washing’. We note that promotional industries structure visibility as a desirable and even inevitable requirement for both reinforcing and reconfiguring social arrangements. Consequently, they foster a mirage that celebrates the actions of individuals without actually producing meaningful change, while obscuring invisibility as an equally valid strategy of resistance.

The social side of business: content, traffic and visibility

“…Goodman (2012) showed that whilst having one “like” is good for the brand, fans sharing brand contents with their social networks is excellent social marketing for the brand. By sharing brand contents, the family, friends and colleagues of the fan who might not know about the brand can see and endorse the brand (Jiménez-Martínez and Edwards, 2023). In doing so, the brand gains exposure to new audiences and its social visibility is boosted (Dellarocas et al , 2007; Hasan and Wang, 2020; Luo and Zhang, 2013).…”

“…A beer firm may have as many as 50 different Facebook pages, along with YouTube clips and YouTube channels and several tweets encouraging user traffic and facilitating the brand's social visibility (Lobstein et al , 2017; Pierce et al , 2022). In this sense, social visibility is the public exposure of the brand on SM and traffic is users' presence and interactions on the SM (Jiménez-Martínez and Edwards, 2023) and both traffic and social visibility can be encouraged by the contents generated (Amoah et al , 2021; Morra et al , 2018; van Tubergen et al , 2021; Vo Minh et al , 2022). Nevertheless, little research has been conducted to explore the correlation between the content generated, the SM traffic and the brand's social visibility.…”