Eşitsizliğin Pazarlanması: Lüks Tüketim Üzerinden Sosyoekonomik Tabakalaşma Analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışma, lüks tüketim pratiklerinin pazarlama stratejileri aracılığıyla sosyoekonomik tabakalaşmayı nasıl yeniden ürettiğini disiplinlerarası bir bakış açısıyla ele almaktadır. Araştırmada, nitel içerik analizi ve TOPSIS (Çok Kriterli Karar Verme) yöntemi birlikte kullanılmıştır. Nitel boyutta Louis Vuitton, Rolex, Mercedes-Benz, Gucci ve Apple gibi markaların sosyal medya paylaşımları ve reklam kampanyaları incelenmiş; statü vurgusu, ayrıcalıklı yaşam temaları ve erişilemezlik stratejileri öne çıkarılmıştır. Nicel boyutta ise markalar, fiyat ulaşılmazlığı, ayrıcalıklı yaşam vurgusu, statü sembolü olma ve sınıfsal görsellik kriterleri açısından TOPSIS yöntemiyle karşılaştırmalı olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, lüks tüketimin yalnızca ekonomik bir faaliyet değil, aynı zamanda kültürel ve sembolik sermayenin bir göstergesi olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Özellikle Louis Vuitton ve Gucci yüksek skorlarıyla tabakalaşmayı en güçlü biçimde temsil ederken, Apple’ın daha düşük skorları sektörel farklılıklara işaret etmektedir. Çalışma, pazarlama söylemlerinin toplumsal eşitsizlikleri pekiştirme ve meşrulaştırmadaki kritik rolünü vurgulamakta; bu bağlamda lüks markaların kapsayıcı ve sürdürülebilir temsil stratejileri geliştirmesinin önemine dikkat çekmektedir.

Keywords

• Lüks Tüketim
• Pazarlama
• Sosyoekonomik Tabakalaşma
• TOPSİS

MARKETİNG INEQUALİTY: AN ANALYSİS OF SOCİOECONOMİC STRATİFİCATİON THROUGH LUXURY CONSUMPTİON

Abstract

This study examines how luxury consumption practices reproduce socioeconomic stratification through marketing strategies from an interdisciplinary perspective. The research employs a combination of qualitative content analysis and the TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) method. On the qualitative side, the social media posts and advertising campaigns of leading global brands such as Louis Vuitton, Rolex, Mercedes-Benz, Gucci, and Apple were analyzed, with particular attention to themes of status emphasis, privileged lifestyle representations, and strategies of inaccessibility. On the quantitative side, the TOPSIS method was applied to evaluate brands across criteria including price inaccessibility, promotion of exclusivity, symbolic status, and class-based visuality. The findings reveal that luxury consumption functions not only as an economic activity but also as an indicator of cultural and symbolic capital. Louis Vuitton and Gucci, with their higher TOPSIS scores, emerged as the most prominent representatives of social stratification, whereas Apple’s relatively lower scores reflect sectoral distinctions. The study underscores the critical role of marketing discourse in reinforcing and legitimizing social inequalities, while highlighting the need for luxury brands to develop more inclusive and sustainable representational strategies.

Keywords

• Luxury Consumption
• Marketing
• Socioeconomic Stratification
• TOPSIS

References

1. Ambrasat, J., Scheve, C., Schauenburg, G., Conrad, M., & Schröder, T. (2016). Unpacking the habitus: Meaning making across lifestyles. Sociological Forum, 31(4), 994–1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12293
2. Baudrillard, J. (1998). The consumer society: Myths and structures. SAGE Publications.
3. Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. Polity Press.
4. Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty. Polity Press.
5. Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of-the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051–13069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056
6. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
7. Bilgin, Y. (2018). We can see who you are! Reflections of social visibility of consumption on consumer–brand identity, WOM communication, and brand loyalty. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(3), 2204–2231.
8. Bilous, O. (2021). Social TV advertising in Ukraine and the EU: Topics, impact, effectiveness through the prism of media literacy. Media Education, (3), 398–407.

9. Bing, L., Shi, S., & Liu, W. (2023). The effect mechanism of the celebrity persona on consumers’ purchase intention: Based on the analysis of the grounded theory. Kybernetes, 53(7), 2322–2341. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2022-1300
10. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Harvard University Press.
11. Chen, W., & Liu, J. (2023). When less is more: Understanding consumers’ responses to minimalist appeals. Psychology & Marketing, 40(10), 2151–2162. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21869
12. Dubois, B., & Duquesne, P. (1993). The market for luxury goods: Income versus culture. European Journal of Marketing, 27(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569310024530
13. Dwyer, R. (2009). Making a habit of it. Journal of Consumer Culture, 9(3), 328–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540509341773
14. Freeman, K., Condron, D., & Steidl, C. (2019). Structures of stratification: Advancing a sociological debate over culture and resources. Critical Sociology, 46(2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920518823888
15. Guellec, D., & Paunov, C. (2017). Digital innovation and the distribution of income. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23987
16. Han, Y. J., Nunes, J. C., & Drèze, X. (2010). Signaling status with luxury goods: The role of brand prominence. Journal of Marketing, 74(4), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.4.15
17. Horwitz, I., Matheny, K., Laryea, K., & Schnabel, L. (2022). From bat mitzvah to the bar: Religious habitus, self-concept, and women’s educational outcomes. American Sociological Review, 87(2), 336–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224221076487
18. Högman, J., Wagnsson, S., & Bellander, S. (2024). Implementing a free lending of sports and leisure equipment service: A cross-sectional survey exploring user characteristics, utilization patterns, and significance among children and youth. BMC Public Health, 24(1), Article 19339. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19339-3
19. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer. Josiassen, A., & Assaf, A. G. (2013). Look at me—I am flying: The influence of social visibility of consumption on tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 40, 155–175.
20. Kapferer, J. N., & Bastien, V. (2009). The luxury strategy: Break the rules of marketing to build luxury brands. Kogan Page.
21. Kim, J., Park, J., & Septianto, F. (2022). The impact of socioeconomic status on preferences for sustainable luxury brands. Psychology & Marketing, 39(8), 1563–1578. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21671
22. Klimczuk, A. (2015). Cultural capital. In The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of consumption and consumer studies (pp. 1–3). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118989463.wbeccs083
23. Mitchell, R. (2001). Thorstein Veblen. Organization & Environment, 14(4), 389–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026601144001
24. Mitchell, R. (2001). Veblen revisited: The role of conspicuous consumption in marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(7–8), 735–753. https://doi.org/10.1362/026725701323366858
25. Purhonen, S. (2015). Generations on paper: Bourdieu and the critique of “generationalism.” Social Science Information, 55(1), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018415608967
26. Rangel, R., & Rangel, G. (2020). O indivíduo socialmente falho: Um ensaio baseado em Veblen e Bauman. Polemica, 20(1), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.12957/polemica.2020.55979
27. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
28. Shih, H. S., Shyur, H. J., & Lee, E. S. (2007). An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(7–8), 801–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2006.03.023
29. So, K. K. F., Wu, L., Xiong, L., & King, C. (2018). Brand management in the era of social media: Social visibility of consumption and customer brand identification. Journal of Travel Research, 57(6), 727–742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517718357
30. Suhaeb, F., & Kaseng, E. (2023). The motivation of socialite women in hanging out in cafes. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 50, 515–523. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v50i1.9934
31. Sukmawati, N. (2022). Unravelling the cinematic tapestry of immigration: A socio-cultural dissection of Indonesian migrant labor in Rawuh (2019). Jurnal Pengkajian dan Penciptaan Film, Televisi, dan Media Konten, 5(2), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.19184/rolling.v5i2.38718
32. Veblen, T. (2007). The theory of the leisure class (Original work published 1899). Oxford University Press. Wiedmann, K. P., Hennigs, N., & Siebels, A. (2009). Value-based segmentation of luxury consumption behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 26(7), 625–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20292
33. Wong, N. Y., & Ahuvia, A. C. (1998). Personal taste and family face: Luxury consumption in Confucian and Western societies. Psychology & Marketing, 15(5), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199808)15:5<423::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-9
34. Yang, X. (2014). Occupational choice and income inequalities under regional integration. Review of Development Economics, 18(2), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12086