‘Consumer’ is an offensive, outdated, stupid word

Or, rather, it is when people apply it to human beings.

Dave Winer says: “I give up.

I don’t identify as a consumer. Why not get it over with and refer to me as a parasite.

Reminds me of the wonderful Jerry Michalski quotation I first got via Doc Searls:

First, we’re readers, viewers, listeners and (most of all) customers, not just “consumers.” As Jerry Michalski put it long ago, a consumer is nothing more than a gullet whose only purpose in life is to gulp products and crap cash. Economically speaking, “consumer,” as the word is commonly used in the advertising business, is a linguistic fossil from the old industrial world where the only way big companies could reach potential customers was through media conduits that sluiced in one direction only, from the privileged few to the captive many. Except as the literal reciprocal of “producer,” “consumer” no longer holds much useful meaning, except where the supply side of advertising talks amongst itself. Worse, using it is risky and misleading. It disses a whole side of the marketplace that grows in power every time one customer links to another one.

One Response to “‘Consumer’ is an offensive, outdated, stupid word”

  1. Maybe it’s just me (or mostly just me), but whenever I hear Dave Winer pronounce on something, I always give the other side an immediate and more sympathetic second look.

    (And I don’t see how his “parasite” comment makes any sense at all; while I can understand, if not agree, that someone might see “consumer” as offensive, it just isn’t ever used as a synonym to “parasite”, that I’ve ever seen.)

Leave a Reply