Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Marketing, Theory & Practice in Post Modern Era
Marketing, Theory & Practice in Post Modern Era
Marketing, Theory & Practice in Post Modern Era
Baker (Ed),
Marketing, Theory and Practice, 3rd edition, 1994.
Chapter 24 :
Marketing, Theory and Practice in a Postmodern Era
Contents
The idea of the present as postmodern is now firmly on the agenda for debate. The
postmodern has become a concept to be wrestled with, and such a battle-ground of
conflicting opinions, that it can no longer be ignored by marketing theory and practice.
But diverse and at times conflicting references to postmodernism and postmodernity are
to be found in a growing number of disciplinary fields and across an increasingly broad
range of discursive formations. Consequently, a number of difficulties are encountered in
the analysis of modern and postmodern, notably the presence of a constellation of related
terms, a lack of specificity associated with the concepts employed, particularly in relation
to their historical referents or periodization, as well as the existence of a number of
conceptual distinctions between positive and negative manifestations of respectively
modern and postmodern forms (Smart, 1990). However, the philosophical and social
changes characterized by the label of "postmodern" are considered as major traits of our
times by a growing number of European and North-American marketing practicioners
and researchers (Brown, 1993; Firat, 1991 a, 1991 b and 1992; Hirschman and Holbrook,
1992; Ogilvy, 1990; Venkatesh, 1989 and 1992; see also the special issue of the
International Journal of Research in Marketing, vol. 10, 1993, on "Postmodernism,
Marketing and the Consumer"). In this chapter, we will assume that to speak of
postmodernism is to refer to a specific philosophical perspective replete with
epistemological assumptions and methodological preferences (Rosenau, 1991) that
proposes a complete rethinking of the general principles of marketing theory (Brown,
1993). Similarly, we will assume that to speak of postmodernity is to suggest an epochal
shift or break from modernity involving the emergence of a new social totality with its
own distinct organization principles (Featherstone, 1991) that addresses the challenge of
an aestheticized and tribalized consumption to marketing practice (Badot, Bucci and
Cova, 1993).
The appearance of postmodernism in the social sciences signals more than another novel
academic paradigm. Rather, a radically new and different cultural movement is
coalescing in a broad-gauged re-conceptualization of how we experience and explain the
world around us. The divergent, even contradictory expositions of postmodernism
underline the need to distinguish among its various orientations if we are ever to be able
to talk about it all. There are probably as many forms of postmodernism as there are
postmodernists. If it were not so clumsy, we could speak of postmodernisms. But within
this diversity of postmodern pronouncements two broad, general orientations can be
delineated : in its most extreme formulations ("skeptical postmodernism"),
postmodernism is revolutionary, it goes to the very core of what constitutes social science
and radically dismisses it ; in its more moderate proclamations ("affirmative
postmodernism"), postmodernism encourages substantive re-definition and innovation
(Rosenau, 1991, p. 4). The skeptical postmodernists, offering a pessimistic, negative,
gloomy assessment, argue that the postmodern age is one of fragmentation, disintegration,
malaise, meaninglessness, a vagueness or even absence of moral parameters and societal
chaos. They argue that the the destructive character of modernity makes the postmodern
age one of radical, unsurpassable uncertainty. Although the affirmative postmodernists
agree with the skeptical postmodernists' critique of modernism; they have a more
optimistic view of the postmodern era. Most affirmatives search for a philosophical and
intellectual practice that is nondogmatic, tentative and nonideological. These
postmodernists do not, however, shy away from affirming an ethic or making normative
choices (Rosenau, 1991, pp. 15-16). Both skeptics and affirmatives challenge those
versions of modern social science that claim objectivity, causality, a materialist reality,
and universal rules of inquiry. Skeptical postmodernists argue that reality is pure illusion :
everything is intertextual, not causal or predictive. Their preferred methods include anti-
objective, introspective interpretation and deconstruction. Relativism and uncertainty
characterize their views. They doubt the value of reason and contend it is impossible to
establish standard criteria for judging intellectual production. Affirmative postmodernists
also indict modern science. Their own understanding of reality is constructivist or
contextualist. Explanation is not only weakly intertextual but also teleogical. Positive
value orientations and specific normative goals openly guide the affirmatives' version of
social science. Methodology depends on emotion, intuition, and imagination. Although
ambivalent about reason, few affirmatives are however willing to abandon it altogether
(Rosenau, 1991, p. 23).
a) While modern social science strives to discover and depict what it calls external reality,
postmodernists hold that there are no adequate means for representing it.
b) While modern social science has assumed causality and prediction were essential to
explanation, postmodernists consider both uninteresting because, they argue, the
requirements of temporal priority and independent, external reality assumed by these
concepts are dubious. In a world where everything is related in an absolute interactive
way, temporal priority, required by causality, is nearly impossible to establish.
c) While within modern social science, it is often assumed that values should not bias
inquiry and that research should be impartial and investigators detached, postmodernists
agree that values, normative questions, feelings, and emotions are all part of human
intellectual production.
d) While modern social science is guided by general rules of method that direct the
conduct of research (its more orthodox practitioners assume that there is but a single
method, a self-correcting scientific method that is universal in its application across
disciplines), postmodernism is oriented towards methods that apply to a broad range of
phenomena, focus on the margins, highlight uniqueness, concentrate on the enigmatic,
and appreciate the unrepeatable. All its methods relinquish any attempt to create new
knowledge in the modern sense of the word. Therefore, postmodern social science
presumes methods that multiply paradox, inventing ever more elaborate repertoires of
questions, each of which encourages an infinity of answers, rather than methods that
settle on solutions.
e) While modern science specifies precise criteria for evaluating knowledge claims and
has guidelines for questioning theories and asserting counterclaims, postmodernists, and
especially the skeptical postmodernists, argue that the very idea of strict evaluative
standards goes against the whole postmodernist philosophy of science. "They disparage
modern science's standards and its criteria for evaluating knowledge and all accepted,
conventional means to judge the results of intellectual inquiry in any form. They take aim
at coherence because false or otherwise wrong versions can hold together as well as right
ones. They reject consistency as a criterion, calling for a proliferation of inconsistent
theories rather than a weeding out of bad from good theories. Nothing can be proved;
nothing can be falsified. They dismiss the possibility of evaluating theory on the basis of
data, adding that if theory exists at all it must be liberated from data and observation.
Standards are not needed if one gives up the idea of truth-as-a-matter-of-matching-up-
facts-to-theory" (Rosenau, 1991, p. 134).
The term postmodernity renders accurately the defining traits of the social condition that
emerged throughout the affluent countries of Europe and of European descent in the
course of the 20th century, and took progressively its present shape in the second half of
this century (Turner, 1990). The term is accurate as it draws attention to continuity and
discontinuity as two faces of the intricate relationship between the present social
condition and the formation that it preceded and gestated. It brings into relief the intimate,
genetic bond that ties the new, postmodern social condition to modernity - the social
formation that emerged in the same part of the world in the course of the 18th century,
and took its final shape during the 19th (Bauman, 1992 a, p. 149). Postmodernity may be
interpreted as fully developed modernity ; as modernity which goes beyond its false
consciousness and comes to understand what it actually was doing all along i.e.,
producing ambivalence and pluralism, and also reconciles itself to the fact that the
purposes which were originally set, e.g. rational order and individual freedom, will never
be reached (Bauman, 1992 b, p. 134).
It is remarkable that modernity emphasized essentially the utilitarian value ("use value")
of the object, that which enabled the modern individual to be freer and more independent
because objects do the work for him. The quality of modern objects is their use value
without defect ("the zero defect"). They are designed to serve and to satisfy the needs of
the individual. This use value can be functional (material attributes) or symbolic
(immaterial attributes) like the so-called "status symbol", or a combination of the two.
What is always at stake is the individual in his/her independence from others. Objects
circulate between producers and consumers who have a priori no social link. If a
minimum social link exists, it is at the service of the economic link, therefore at the
service of the individual freed of his/her social obligations. When freed of his/her public
obligations (the grocer, the salesman...), the modern individual may choose the
obligations he/she wishes in the private sphere. Tradition, for its part, perceived objects
more as supporting the social link between persons; so it had above all a "linking value",
before a use value. According to this viewpoint, all that circulates is at the service of the
social link. Going to buy a newspaper is, first of all, meeting Michael the newsagent,
talking with him for pleasure or out of obligation, and in addition buying the local paper.
And this local paper is the daily link with the spatial community : village, town, region...
The modern individual did not want this constraining link. For him/her, the economic
sphere had to be completely cut off from the societal sphere. Self service, where "use
value" and not "linking value" is sold, is his/her ideal. With the neo-tribalism
distinguishing postmodernity, a reconfiguration of the use value and the linking value of
objects is taking shape (see figure 1). They serve the person in his/her independent
individuality, and they serve as "cult-objects" to the ephemeral communities to which
he/she participates with others. Cult-objects support the interdependence between persons,
either symbolically or instrumentally, an interdependence which was refused and denied
by modernity. These objects can thus be found in societal meeting places, in codes of
behaviour and dress styles, and above all in the rituals and the emblems of each tribe.
They evoke the value system and the taboos which characterise the numerous postmodern
tribes, even the most short-lived.
If, on a superficial level, postmodernism appears to parallel and provide a rationale, albeit
a rationale that rejects rationality, for the major elements of marketing theory, the
adoption of postmodernism is not without penalty (Brown, 1993). The anti-universalism
and anti-foundationalism of postmodernism have very serious implications for marketing
theory, the bulk of whose principles are predicated on the archetypal modernist
assumptions of analysis, planning and control. Whether it be marketing planning
procedures, the product life cycle, SWOT analyses, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the
Howard-Sheth model of consumer behaviour, the trickle down principle of fashion
diffusion, the strategic matrices of Ansoff, Porter and the Boston Consulting Group,
Copeland's classification of goods, the typologies of retailing institutions, hierarchies of
advertising effects, the wheel of retailing or, needless to say, the four P's, the majority of
marketing and marketing related conceptualisations are basically modernist in orientation.
They represent attempts - admittedly imperfect attempts - to make general statements
about marketing phenomena and are thus deemed unacceptable by many postmodernists
(Brown, 1993). More, many marketers contend that the recent postmodernist
development in the philosophy of science (see point 2 and the "skeptical postmodernists")
imply that objectivity in marketing research is an illusion, a chimera, or impossible.
"Truth" in marketing theory and research has consequently become the center of a major
dispute amongst scholars of the discipline starting with the seminal article of Hunt (1990)
in the Journal of Marketing, "Truth in Marketing Theory and Research", followed by
critical comments on "scientific realism" made by Peter (1992) , then an alternative
perspective proposed by Zinkhan and Hirscheim (1992) and replies by Hunt (1992 and
1993).
The meaning ascribed to objects, often has as much importance as their instrumental
functions for the postmodern person. He/she seeks in objects as much their use value
(functions and symbols at the service of the individual, and as a mean of differentiation)
as their linking value (aesthetics and emotion at the service of the social link between
persons, and as a means of de-differentiation). A productÕs technical functions should
not be embellished as in the modern era, rather, the aesthetics are its main function (the
aesthetic meaning here, faithful to its etymology, is understood as the fact of
experiencing emotions, feelings, common passions, and in very different areas of social
life, and not in its narrow sense of superficial beauty). That the object actually does some
ÒusefulÓ things Ñ like taking us from A to B, mash potatoes, or keep us warm Ñ is taken
for granted. Technological innovation, the hallmark of modernism, is being gradually
substituted by aesthetic innovation. Unlike simple modern goods, postmodern objects are
transmitted more than they are bought, and are thus part of a system of gift-giving,
parallel to the exchange system in our society. They then play the role of promoting
interaction, of mediators and of societal cement in our postmodern societies. The major
marketing problem that companies are facing with postmodernity seems to be that they
manufacture products which, on the market, become commodities with a certain use
value, but are rarely objects with the potential of having meanings based on their linking
value. This can be related to one of the key manifestations of postmodernity -
fragmentation -, where there is the separation of products from their original function, of
the signifier from the signified, and the product from the need (Firat, 1992). The
symbolic meaning of products is no longer fixed but free-floating, and each individual
may ascribe different cultural meanings to a product depending on the extent to which
they share the collective imagination and thus escape from the regime of truth. As each
good may have a different meaning for each consumer, then perceptions and emotions
may be unique and not reducible to conventional market segmentation techniques.
Consequently, marketing need to develop methodologies for investigating the meaning of
consumer goods that elude the artificial limitations of positivist approaches that assume
homogeneity of meaning within market segments, and recognise that the consumer may
find it difficult to reduce the consumption to simple verbal labels (Elliott, 1993, p. 137).
Therefore, the postmodern challenge for companies seems now to be to develop societal
innovations (Cova and Svanfeldt, 1993, p. 300), that is to say innovations that are capable
of provoking the emergence of new aesthetic and cultural meanings in the societal system.
These societal innovations inscribe themselves in a societal context rather than in a
market segment. Thus, they constitute a linkage between new socio-cultural trends and
tendencies and current technological potentials, by introducing change in a society.
Societal innovations renew the relation between products and their users. They result
from the recombination of familiar material in unconventional ways and they serve as a
means by which a society both encourages and endures change. Apart from their insertion
in a societal context, and the fact that they have changed our habits concerning music,
transport, computers, domestic life, etc., societal innovations are most often associated
with a single firm, such as Swatch throughout Europe, The Body Shop in England or
Dcouvertes Gallimard in France. Microwave ovens can be said to have developed
within, and reinforced, a social trend, and they can be said to have changed our habits,
but few people would refer to their microwave oven as for instance their Toshiba or their
Philips (except maybe ironically). In other words, they are not very cultish as objects Ñ
ÒMy micro-wave oven is a Toshiba, but my Mac is in fact a PCÓ Ñand do not benefit
from a status of singularity. Above all, postmodernity clearly advocates against the
traditional product/market marriage, based on functional and technical attributes of the
product combined with stable illusory segments, and emphasizes the flexible
dimension of marketing. Postmodern evidences suggest that even niches could be so
ephemeral that it could be very difficult to detect them and to serve them. Trends might
cross different tribes or different groups at different rates across society. Marketing
should help companies to detect emerging aesthetic and cultural trends and to forecast
when, where and how these trends might appear across different tribes in order to create
new ephemeral markets. The basic strategy is to anchor a brand to a major societal trend,
and to use that brand to cover a wide range of products adapted to minor, local and
ephemeral trends. The winners will be those companies closest to their tribes and most
able to respond to, and even create new trends in society through societal innovations.
Among the postmodern marketing practices, two seem particularly suited to deal with
these aesthetic and cultural trends and tribes (Badot, Bucci and Cova, 1993, p. 52) :
-Trend-detection;
-Ethno-research.
A societal innovation seems to be the result of the encounter where the culture and
competence of the firm perfectly match the currents and stimuli of society. For the
company, it is less important to have a technologically perfect product than to "sniff
out"an emerging trend and to stick to it by developing a product which represents the
emotional link between this trend and the culture of the company . Successful societal
innovations are dependent on both a company culture stimulating innovation and an
understanding, and sensitivity, for the culture (and its manifestations) outside the firm.
Societal innovations appear where the internal culture and the know-how of the firm
match, and adapt, to the culture outside the firm and its manifestations. The impulse to
innovate comes from the external culture (the stimuli) and, when received by a
favourable internal culture, can be transformed into societal products or services.
Therefore, the company needs to scan the societal environment in order to detect the
favourable trends. For that purpose it may be supported by a network of "experts" of
societal trends. These "experts" may be journalists, professors, stylists, philosophers, non
conformists... and serve as gatekeepers of a sort, reviewing aesthetic, social, and
cultural innovations as they first appear in very diverse areas, judging some as important
and others as trivial. It is their responsibility to observe, as best they can, the whirling
mass of innovation and decide what is fad and what is fashion, what is ephemeral and
what will endure. A Delphi approach can be used to structure their judgements. A societal
environmental scanning can also be implemented to feel the possible futures on the basis
of the experience of other sectors or other countries.
Another common trait of marketing approaches that try to cope with postmodernity is the
emphasis on closeness to the customer. Today's marketing restoratives (the so-called
"one-to-one marketing", "micro-marketing", "maxi-marketing", "database marketing",
"relationship marketing", etc ...) desire to build, develop and maintain a relationship with
the customer as an individual rather than to bombard a mass market (Brown, 1993).
However, many of these approaches are too tinged with modern views and fail to deal
with the double postmodern movement of aestheticization and tribalism in everydaylife.
Believers in "one-to-one marketing", for example, have got it all wrong for they wish to
be as close as possible to the consumer without sharing anything with him/her. They
confuse proximity and intimacy. They base everything on customer service; they believe
that individuals wish a "personalized service" in terms of personalization of functions,
while in fact they wish a "personalized link". Of course, they do not want to create a link
with all salesmen but find it pleasant and rewarding to be sometimes greeted and
recognized in the street. Just as the everyday life objects represent as many links, real or
virtual, with other persons encountered. Consumption can therefore be studied as much
for its functional and symbolic aspects relative to the individual as for its emotional and
aesthetic aspects relative to the link between individuals. Consequently, marketing can be
defined less as the launching of a product on a market than as the ascribing of meanings
in a society. After having borrowed extensively from economics and psycho-sociology,
marketing seems to need to resort to anthropology and ethno-sociology in order to refine
its approach. Answering the challenge of postmodernity for marketing practice implies
rethinking its essence in the socio-economic paradigm. In any case, marketing activity
should no longer be analysed as an independent economic activity but as an activity
embedded in a societal context which, at the same time, encompasses it and renders it
possible.
6. Conclusion : limits
Arndt, J. (1985). "The Tyranny of Paradigms : The Case for Paradigmatic Pluralism in
Marketing", in Dholakia, N. and Arndt, J. (eds), Changing the Course of Marketing :
Alternative Paradigms for Widening Marketing Theory, Research in Marketing,
Supplement 2, Sheth. Greenwich : Jai Press, pp. 1-25.
Badot, O., Bucci, A. and Cova, B. (1993). "Societing : Managerial Response to European
Aestheticization". European Management Journal, Special Issue EAP 20th Anniversary,
pp 48-56.
Cova, B. and Salle, R. (1992). "Models of Industrial Buying Behavior : Overview and
Rapprochement of New Trends of Research". Proceedings of the Marketing Science
Conference , London, July.
Dholakia, N. and Arndt, J. ,eds, (1985). Changing the Course of Marketing : Alternative
Paradigms for Widening Marketing Theory, Research in Marketing, Supplement 2, Sheth.
Greenwich : Jai Press.
Elliott, R. (1993). "Marketing and the Meaning of Postmodern Culture" in Brownlie, D.,
Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. (eds), Rethinking Marketing : New
Perspectives on the Discipline and Profession. Coventry : Warwick Business School, pp
134-142.
Firat, A.F. (1991a). "The Consumer in Postmodernity", in Holman, R.H. and Soloman
M.R. (eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XVIII. Association for Consumer
Resarch : Provo, pp. 70-76.
Firat, A.F. (1991b). "Postmodern Culture, Marketing and the Consumer", in Childers,
T.L. et al (eds), Marketing Theory and Applications. Chicago : American Marketing
Association, pp. 237-242.
Firat, A.F. (1992). "Fragmentations in the Postmodern", in, Sherry, J.F. and Sternthal, B.
(eds), Advances in Consumer Research Vol XIX. Provo : Association for Consumer
Research, pp. 203-205.
Hirschman, C.H. and Holbrook, M.B. (1992). Postmodern Consumer Research : The
Study of Consumption as Text. Newbury Park : Sage.
Hunt, S.D. (1990). "Truth in Marketing Theory and Research". Journal of Marketing, vol.
54, July, pp. 1-15.
Ogilvy, J. (1990). "This Postmodern Business". Marketing and Research Today, Vol. 18,
N¡ 1, pp. 4-21.
Peter, J.P. (1992). "Realism or Relativism for Marketing Theory and Research : A
comment on Hunt's Scientific Realism". Journal of Marketing, vol. 56, April, pp. 72-79.
Zinkhan, G.M. and Hirscheim, R. (1992). "Truth in Marketing Theory and Research : An
Alternative Perspective". Journal of Marketing, vol. 56, April, pp. 80-88.
Postmodern References
Bell, C. (1992). Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York, : Oxford University Press.
Maffesoli, M. (1991). "The Ethic of Aesthetics". Theory, Culture and Society, vol. 8, pp.
7-20.
Rosenau, P.M. (1991). Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences : Insights, Inroads and
Intrusions. Princeton University Press.
Smart, B. (1990). "Modernity, Postmodernity and the Present" in Turner, B.S., ed.
Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity. London : Sage, pp. 14-30.
Turner, B.S., ed, (1990). Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity. London : Sage.
OLIVIER BADOT, EAP-Ecole Europenne des Affaires, 6 Avenue de la Porte de
Champerret, 75 838 Paris Cedex 17.
Bernard Cova is Professor, EAP, Paris and Associate Research Director, IRE, Institut de
Recherche de l'Entreprise in Lyon . He received his Doctorate from the University of
Paris Dauphine, and specializes in the research of alternative paradigms for widening
marketing theory . Apart from teaching industrial marketing and international marketing
at the EAP and innovation marketing in the Domus Academy in Milan, he manages a
European research programme on Project Marketing and Systems Selling supported by
major industrial companies. He has published over 50 articles in academic journals and
proceedings, and is on the Editorial Boards of five European academic journals. His latest
book, co-authored with his colleague Olivier Badot, is Le no-marketing, which traces
different scenarii for a new marketing in Europe.
Ñ Ñ
x { á| ¥
ááeverybody's way of life (Bauman
o the tribal rules (seldom do they have clearly codified rules to which the submission
could be demanded), nor on the strength of neighbourly bonds or intensity of reciprocal
exchange (most tribes are de-territorialized, and communication between their members
is hardly at any time more intense than the intercourse between members and non-
members of the tribe). Postmodern tribes
ar 8 M W Z ¬ ì í ð Ç
Ð Ñ j ® ¯ Ê Ô Þ ë ð ý
Z
g
æ
ì
¼
> &à )Ç )ã *- * 4è 5
6Â 6Ç 6É 6ó <2 =y @Ù AX F F' F4
F; I² IÃ IÉ Iá L L² MN MW Qg Qo X
Xï _r _ j` kþ p¦ pÙ qð sW ~E ~a ~
¨ ~Ê × é $ 8 ~ 5 _ ´ & 9
Lüùüôüôüñîñëêñêëñë ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ñë é é é ñë é é é é é
é é é é é é é ñ é é é é é é é é é ñ é @ @
0 À 0 0 \ L 7 > ¥v ¥w -R
-Y ¸« ¸Â ¿Ö ¿ì Às ÀÊ Á Á Áî Â
Â8 ÂV Âï à á ÃÏ Ä
Äc Å1 Åy Æ
Æ3 ÆÄ ÆÉ ÆÑ Æô Ç Ç´ È ÈJ È È
Õ É# Ée ɸ ÉÌ Ê[ Êw ÊÍ Êâ ËD ËX Ë¥
ËÁ ÌU Ìi ÌÎ ÌÓ ÌÛ Ìû ͵ ÍÚ Î Î Î¶
ÎÌ Îä Îú Ï~ Ϩ ÐR ÐW РТ Ðã Ñ Ñ*
ÑH Ñx Ѻ Ñé Ò Ò-
ÒF Ò~ Ò ÒÉ Òà Ó$ Ó? Ój Ó Ó³ Óü
Ôm Ô ÔË Ôòþ þ ý þ ú ÷ôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñô
ñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñô÷ôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñôñ @
@ _ Ôò Õ
Õ Ø Ø¨ Ûí Ûþ Ü? Ü@ ÜA ÜF ÜG Ü
L ÜM Ü_ Ü~ Ü Üüûúûú úù ÷ ùô
@
@ À @ L M Z ï
ð Æ Ç Ð Ñ [ ý Q i j
k ® ¯
»
¼
O P - - » !a " % )â )ã
)ä *- * .µ .¶ >± >² NË NÌ X Xúóìóóìóæà
ÚàààææàææàààæàÕÐæËÆÐÁмз²-¨£àààà Ð Ð ä
"ä
ä
8ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
(ä
ä
ä ä
ä
ä ä ä ä ä
ä 2 X Xî Xï `X `Y a
a aë aì o^ o_ |; ^ _ ³ ´ Ø Ù
© ª U g x y ¥v ¥w °r °s ¸ª ¸«
¸Â ¸Ã ¿Ô ¿Ö ¿ì ¿í Á Á ÁÎ ÁÏ Â
Â
Âp Âq Ã0 Ã1 Ãâ Ãã ħ Ĩ Å« Ŭ Æj
Æk Ç Ç, Çí Çî Èd Èe Èø Èù Éz É{
Éç Éè Ê Ê Ë Ë Ëu Ëv ËÜ ËÝ Ì Ì
Í0 Í1 Î úôîîîîîîîîîîîèîãããããÝÝÕÕãÕÕãîèÕÕÌÌÇîîîîîãããããããîãããããããããããîîããã
ãããããããããããããã
7
ä
ä N ΠΠε ζ ÎÌ ÎÍ Ï
Ï
ÏÌ ÏÍ Ðr Ðs ÐÉ ÐÊ Ñ Ñ Ñd Ñe ÑÒ
ÑÓ Ò Ò Òg Òh Ò² Ò³ Òò Òó ÓS ÓT
Ó Ó Ô Ô Ô° Ô± Õ Õ Õ Õ
Õt Õu Ø Ø Ù Ù
Ü> Ü? Ü@ ÜA ÜB ÜC ÜJ ÜK ÜL ÜM
Ü ÜûûûòûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûìûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûæææææææææáÛáÕááæáá
ó
ô ä
9
` ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ Normal utan indrag
Ingress Signatur Paragraf Paragraf2Citat Citat med
indrag 0ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ @ ! ÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ¿ Èÿ
È
ô þ
Ô þ
à
ð ó ô ö
Þ Þ
ÛL ÿÿ
ÿÿ @ ÿÿ ÛL@ ÜM
i
R Í (ä 6F Cÿ QÓ _
kÕ yE $ n @ ®
º§ ¾Ô Èç Ò Ô ÛL ÿÿ @ ÿÿ ýP ÿÿ
´@ ÿÿ :P ÿÿ
k@ ÿÿ ÍP ÿÿ
¶@ ÿÿ OP ÿÿ @ ÿÿ
öP ÿÿ
:@ ÿÿ
;P ÿÿ
6@ ÿÿ
gP ÿÿ
)@ ÿÿ P ÿÿ V@ ÿÿ }P ÿÿ @ ÿÿ
k ® ¯ ÛL ä ä @ ä
L Ôò Ü o p q X Î Ü r s t
! " H H
ÿâÿä 6 G{ Þ H H
d '
@
A .hº» ÅR @ H
-:LaserWriter
( K þ ( µ À Ô Ô
Ô D Ä k a !-
>þ ?` zS z¤ ¹ù º Ô Û> Û? Û@ ÛJ
ÛK ÛL k !a "-
?þ @` {S {¤ Ü_ »
Õ Ü Ü@
ÜA ÜK ÜL