What Creates Semiotic Viscosity? Not All Signs are Created Equal

Chris Barnham

Symbols are not just cultural constructions – they are formed, in Charles Peirce’s view, through a semiotic process of involving icons and indices. This leads to specific structures being formed in the symbolic sign which are hierarchical and which evolve through a continuous action of qualification.

Within these symbolic structures, there are elements – at the top of the hierarchy – which are more firmly embedded in the mind of the consumer. These values are formed by the consumer themselves – using iconicity. Because they are created by the consumer they are more likely to be viscose. Lower down the hierarchy there are others (often more indexical) which are incidental to the symbol. They are more fluid and can be changed more easily through brand advertising etc.

Radically, this Peircean model contrasts with the conventional marketing view that a brand is a name (or a logo) with a set of mental associations – which have higher or lower levels of incidence. In such a non-semiotic (e.g. quantitative) structure, it would appear that marketing professionals can increase (or decrease) a particular brand association by simply messaging the consumer. 

But as we know from experience (and I will give an example), it is sometimes very difficult to change these more embedded values in a brand. Indeed, trying to deny any negative values at the top of the semiotic hierarchy through conventional messaging methods often makes matters worse. 

What is key is recognition of how semiotic viscosity is formed in the first place – through the action of consumers themselves forming the ‘wrong’ icons when they encounter the brand.