| Summary: | This paper analyzes how the Lego Group discourse portrays children, education, play, themselves and attempts to reveal corresponding ideologies surrounding the brick. The LEGO Group claim equality, honesty and transparency in their communications, and within their business ecosystem, at their core are their traditional family values, creating an intriguing and multi-layered discourse. This thesis explores the construction of representations, from a constructionist approach using discourse analysis and language coding, aiming to uncover what is revealed and ignored. The Lego Group positions themselves as one of the future solutions to the widening gap between current educational systems and the needs of future young adults in the workforce of our rapidly changing society. They continuously portray the ‘other’ actors as bad - whether in education, technology or activities. They define every subject they cover in their own terms, creating a LEGO language and microworld philosophy. There is an imbalance between their time promoting children’s agency and time spent discussing 21st century education; the latter concerns appear to far outweigh their portrayal of children, leading to conclusions that marketing logic and aspired educational market share has a stronger influence on LEGO discourse. Children are constructed as agentic, competent and commodified when selling them new products and services, as adults-in-training when discussing education and as vulnerable or innocent when highlighting child safety concerns online. Education is viewed in terms of failure, power and change, and their versions of play and creativity as the solution to all of society's ills. Their discourse reflects The LEGO Group’s position and hegemony as one of the most powerful and influential toy companies in the world. This study contributes towards the current gap in research surrounding The LEGO Group discourse, and attempts to reveal the competing ideologies of neoliberal business values versus social good and incorporates concerns of childhood studies exploring whether this company rather represents or uses children within the context of its educational - business ecosystem.
|
|---|
