On the way to work today, I sat on the tube, wondering what my colleagues would think of the new lozenge I've bought, that I thought of proffering them. Vicks was the last brand I bought, Wrigley's is the current. I didn't care about the difference between these brands when buying a simple lozenge, as I was handed one of them for free as I bought the other. Marketing ploy.

Whisked on the way towards my guinea-pig colleagues, I realised I wouldn't be able to say "Would you like a Vicks?" as one commonly says here, rather than "Would you like a lozenge?". As ludicrous as it might sound, I'm willing to bet money on the fact that people hereabouts would rather buy Vicks than Wrigley's because the first-mentioned brand's more common. Another factor - I'm guessing here - is because "Vicks" has become synonymous with "lozenge" like "Xerox" is identical to "copy". The brand is the total description of what's on offer, like "coke" for Coca-Cola.

As big brands are growing bigger, their competition is of course shrinking and hence, selection is becoming abysmal. You want a soft-drink that's not from the Coca-Cola corporation? Ilaughinyourgeneraldirection. A hamburger that's not from one of the big corporations? Clothes that aren't made by sweat-shop workers?

Refuse to lose and go against the grain! Fight the power! Try not to let the brands work their way into your head, and I know, I sound like a know-it-all Zach de la Rocha, but to constantly question the corporations and - first and foremost - to constantly criticise every "fact" you hear is a really healthy way of thinking outside the box. It's the only way.

If you don't trust me, get "The Corporation" for free and lurk about yourself.