Christopher Michals

10-30-13
Article Brief # 5
MKT 479
Section 2

Downloading Deviance: Symbolic interactionism and unauthorized file-sharing

The article, found threw the Murphy Library resource, from the The Journal of Marketing
Theory, was authored by Robert Cluley from the University of Leicester, United Kingdom. The
journal article was written about the topic of consumers illegally downloading music content and
how many attempts to stop this behavior from consumers has been ineffective. Overall, the
journal article used concepts from the social sciences, specifically, sociology, to make an
explanation of why this behavior occurs.
The article went in to detail about the moral and ethical intricacies of illegal file sharing
among consumers and that this behavior is likely to continue occurring. The article reflects on
how the process of legal and illegal downloading shares many of the same procedures, especially
the former being without using credit card information or lack of an account. The article
discussed that numerous attempts to stop this behavior in the past have failed and that consumers
appear to justify themselves because they do not feel there is anything really, truly morally
wrong in perform the act of file sharing. The journal article repetitively went into detail on how
the behavior was illegal and went into depth of how this corresponded to the labelling theory of
deviance, which addresses the case that even though people accept the act is illegal; they
continue to do it anyways. The author goes into even more detail on how moral relativism plays
a role into consumer misbehavior and continues to try to intellectualize how or why this occurs
using sociological theory. Simply put, the article gets repetitive in trying to explain why people
continue to share files and argues that it is more of a deviant activity than truly illegal. One thing
that struck me as interesting is that the illegal downloader groups arguments, that they are
becoming the perfect consumers who get the most music while paying as little as possible.
The article, from the authors point of view, was to try to examine the intricacies of why
people knowingly engage in a commonly known illegal behavior but do not seem to care. The
author makes a series of assumptions about the moral behavior of consumers and tries to discuss
why people consider is acceptable because of their various arguments to justify their behavior.
Overall, the author tries to explain why this behavior occurs using many terms from sociology.
I personally think this author is simply being a bit pretentious about using sociological
theories to explain why people illegally download music. In other words, I think the author is
simply intellectualizing, for the sake of intellectualizing, therefore making a question with a
simple answer needlessly complicated. People illegally download music because they can; they

probably cognitively disconnected from the idea that they are committing a crime because it is
through as computer or electronically and only takes a couple clicks on a computer mouse to
commit the act. In other words, it is hilariously simple to download an mp3 file for a person that
has grown accustomed to downloading music. I personally think this author is making many
assumptions, to try to come off as intelligent and informative but fails miserably, but that is just
my opinion.
The article while, in my opinion is mostly an annoying collaboration of moral theories
and ideas of deviancy, it nonetheless is relevant to Marketing Management. Primarily, how the
interaction of an industry can create a base of consumers who are in demand of the product,
which is usually a good thing, can backfire if the content or technological environment allows
the consumers to get a hold of the product without giving anything in return i.e. paying for the
product. One solution to this is to change the form or medium of the product, however in the case
of illegal file sharing; it is unlikely to stop in the near future. There can be other solutions, such
as focusing more on a live entertainment orientation, such as having a market orientation towards
live concerts versus music files. In other words, I think it is safe to say if a consumer finds a way
to get a product in demand free of charge and is acceptable with their attitudes and beliefs about
morality, they will. Rather emphasizes how brand loyalty and product demand can go terribly
wrong for the producers of the product. This issue with file sharing should be taken as an
example to learn from and to be aware of how technological change could have negative
repercussions for producers of consumer products.
The classes that helped me understand the content in this article were Buyer Behavior,
The Social World, and some various psychology classes. The sociology class that I have taken at
previous university helped me understand the content and terms used. I am a bit of a critic in this
particular case, I think the article had some useful content but other than that was mostly drivel
and more just explaining the current state of affairs between the music industry and its
consumers than providing any real useful insight.