Small branding in a big economy

Chris Anderson, of Long Tail fame, just wrote a great post on niche branding. The central thesis: niche brands do better because they're more authentic.

Brands like Converse. Which is vegetarian. And also happens to be owned by Nike. Which has significantly improved its business practices-but is still equated with sweatshops and blah couture.

What is interesting here (to me at least) is that the increasing preference for authenticity is a strikingly postmodern phenomenon-a reaction to the corporatism and mass marketeering of modernity. That is, wanting small over big certainly reflects a desire for the "micronarratives" of postmodernism that stand in contradistinction to the "macronarratives" of modernity.

The economic system, though, as evidenced by Anderson's post, continues to run on industrial scales: corporate behemoths like Hershey's end up gobbling gems like Dagoba (one of my favorite chocolate brands), and often the consumer is none the wiser. Small business may drive the economic engine of America, but we consumers still mostly buy brands that we can find most easily (I know I shop most frequently at Banana Republic-owned by Gap, Inc., which apparently is become a better corporate citizen).

Is it "bad," though? What if all of the behemoths began adopting more conscious practices? Could big business save the world (after they save the cheerleader)?

No easy answers, to be sure. But at least let's start the conversation.