When Companies Consolidate, Customers Suffer

For customers, the existence of different brands of the same or similar products creates choice, the strongest tool any consumer can use to ensure that her voice is heard. But what if this choice was in fact an illusion? A single company could create multiple brands that in reality are the same product with different packaging—thus profiting regardless of the customer’s choice.

With the increased consolidation of consumer products in America, customers are finding themselves with fewer true options than ever before.

A tremendous portion of all consumer brands are owned by just 10 multinational companies: Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble, Kellogg’s, Unilever, Johnson & Johnson, Nestlé, Kraft, General Mills, Mars and PepsiCo. In a similar fashion, the entertainment industry now consists of just six conglomerates, a far cry from the 50-plus that held a stake in the industry thirty years ago.

As an example of the impact on consumers, take a product like mouthwash. A shopper may be left with a choice between the Scope and Listerine brands. Listerine costs about 70 cents more, planting the idea that it is more high-end than Scope. But regardless of the customer’s decision, the sale of either will benefit Johnson & Johnson, the manufacturer of both brands. It is unlikely that most consumers even understand the slight formulaic difference between the two products, but the presence of both creates the all-important choice. The trend exists across just about any consumer product you can imagine, from candy to deodorant and even water.

While big business continues to grow, the walls of separation between brands and companies are getting slimmer. This does not suggest that their products are not of quality, but the lack of healthy competition between brands could spell disaster for consumers who expect the highest caliber. It is up to customers to educate themselves and maintain the value of the customer’s choice.

Democracy needs journalism it can trust.

This election season, the stakes are higher than usual — and so is the pressure on newsrooms to soften their coverage, stay quiet, or just disappear. Independent reporting, the kind that answers to readers instead of advertisers or political pressure, matters more in a moment like this, not less.

For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate owner and no shareholders telling us what to cover or how to cover it. That independence is also our biggest vulnerability: nothing protects it except readers choosing to fund it directly.

Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under in a moment like this, it's rarely the independent, reader-funded ones that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top