Marketing campaigns and advertising content, it should be said, are by no means necessarily directly indicative of normative concerns characteristic of a particular kind of moral economy. But the prevalence in advertising copy, particularly in the auto industry, of the message that products were not produced according to the principle of planned obsolescence indicates how pervasive the concerns were about the practice.
- Political Response to the Issue
By the mid-1960s, the concern over planned obsolescence had become sufficiently widespread and intense that it began to come to the attention of politicians and regulatory agencies. Representative Benjamin S. Rosenthal addressing a meeting in August 1969 on the topic of the rapid expansion of discount retailers commented that “today’s typical consumer is tempted by the marketplace promises of product perfection. But the system that produces, promotes, sells, and services that product can more accurately be characterized by the reality of planned obsolescence and poor quality control.”74 A policy response to the “problem” of planned obsolescence was suggested in 1965 by Esther Peterson, special assistant to the president for consumer afairs. She argued that consumer education was the solution and ought to be incorporated into the high school curriculum. The overarching aim, as she put it, would be to produce a “consumer-led” economy, as opposed to a “consumption-led” economy. In the former, savvy and independent consumers are the chief actors, while in the latter, big business is in charge. Education was seen as a means to produce rational, sovereign consumers, who would secure the development of a virtuous and eficient consumer economy. Consumer sovereignty, on this account, is an ethical end to be accomplished, rather than, as some economists would have it, a given. Drawing attention to planned obsolescence as a central characteristic of the consumer economy, Peterson commented: “In a consumption oriented economy, anything would be permissible . . . planned obsolescence would be the rule rather than the exception to the rule.”75 Her sentiment did not meet with universal approval. The Wall Street Journal wryly commented in response that the “whole notion of indoctrinating the young in commercial conformity makes you wonder if the experts want a consumer directed economy or a flock of expert directed consumers.”76
246
Time for Things