Brandjacking is an activity whereby someone acquires or otherwise assumes the online identity of another entity for the purposes of acquiring that person's or business's brand equity. The term combines the notions of 'branding' and 'hijacking', and has been used since at least 2007 when it appeared in Business Week referencing the term used in a publication by the firm MarkMonitor (MarkMonitor and its PR firm, the Zeno Group, coined the phrase; MarkMonitor registered "BrandJacking Index" as a trademark, but not the term "brandjacking" on its own).[1] The tactic is often associated with use of individual and corporate identities on social mediaorWeb 2.0 sites, as described in Quentin Langley's 2014 book Brandjack,[2] and may be used alongside more conventional (offline) campaign activities.
While similar to cybersquatting, identity theftorphishing in nature and in possible tactics, brandjacking is usually particular to a politician, celebrity or business and more indirect in its nature. A brandjacker may attempt to use the reputation of its target for selfish reasons or seek to damage the reputation of its target for hostile,[3] malicious or for political or campaigning reasons. These reasons may not be directly financial, but the effects on the original brand-holder may often include financial loss - for example, negative publicity may result in the termination of a celebrity's sponsorship deal, or, for a corporation, potentially lead to lost sales or a reduced share price.
Brandjacking avoidance may include:
However, action against the brandjackers and their supporters can actually draw attention to the problem (the Streisand effect). For example, following Greenpeace's KitKat campaign, Nestlé had the video removed from YouTube, but Greenpeace quickly re-posted it to video-sharing site Vimeo.com and highlighted the attempted censorship using Twitter and other social media.[6] Attempts by Nestlé to constrain user activity on its Facebook fan page further fanned the controversy.
