5 posts tagged “personal branding”

The weeks after the US presidential election have been interesting.
   First, certain Republicans wanted to make Gov. Sarah Palin the fall girl of their campaign. They failed. Bill O’Reilly tore in to her pretty quickly but faced a backlash from Republicans who saw the Governor as a heroine of their cause. Sen. John McCain took an entire week to respond, by which time it was “safe” for him to have done so, when the political meter had swung to Gov. Palin’s favour. We have Joe the Plumber now coming out and saying that he wasn’t that impressed with the Senator, but he was impressed by his running-mate.
   Then, we have a shrewd President-elect who has sought to distance himself from the radical elements, the corruption in the Illinois governor’s office, kept in touch with American people via YouTube, and attempted to go forth with a transparent transition process.
   I am not going to get into politics deeply here. My point is that the behaviour of the two candidates speaks volumes toward the way they brand themselves, their notions of leadership and their motives.
   I do not feel then-Sen. Obama’s campaign was the most transparent. There were questions to be answered, as I have stated on this blog. Vagueness is not a way to earn votes—but history has always shown that a campaign on change after years of one president in office works: Clinton 1992, Blair 1997 and Clark 1999 are good examples.
   I did feel Sen. McCain attempted to be more candid. I was unimpressed, however, by points he flip-flopped on—when first faced with the mortgage crisis, his first words were in fact about letting laissez-faire economics have their way. Within weeks he spoke of nationalizing mortgages.
   So much for the maverick who took a position.
   Now elected, President-elect Obama has done right by his YouTube addresses, understanding that he needs to set a vision as well as a strategy and getting people on the ground early. This is not a cynical exercise in PR. Any leader knows that the most effective way to get an organization moving—and in this case a country—is to get stake-holders in on the act early, rather than impose a strategy on to them. I have said the same in any branding job for our clients.
   Sen. McCain’s failure to defend his running-mate rates down there alongside Al Gore’s failure to endorse Sen. Joe Lieberman, as tradition might have suggested he should have done, going for Gov. Howard Dean instead. Gov. Palin was fine at defending herself ultimately, but not before more damage was done to the Republican Party.
   Whether one agrees with his Cabinet choices, Barack Obama’s moves in his transition have been pretty good, and among the most open I have witnessed since I began watching American presidential campaigns. He is using the playbook of modern communications to ensure that the office of the President will continue to deserve respect. While in some respects he has gone against the ‘Change’ cry of his campaign by rewarding Clinton-era loyalists for the Cabinet positions announced so far, it’s another shrewd move to ensure stability from his party. With enough in place, let’s hope that he can get on with the real serious issues.
   Am I going to give Barack Obama five out of five? No. I still hold some concerns over his ideas. But those who questioned his experience—as those who questioned Gov. Palin’s—might be revising their thoughts today. For the most part, these transitional weeks have been well played by Illinois’ rising star.

This is no surprise given the promotions that Sen. Obama has been getting in the media: ‘Obama elicits more excitement than McCain’, according to USA Today.
   I want to be the voice of reason but 21 years in communications tell me that this is important. If your brand, personal or organizational, elicits excitement among its constituents, then you have a greater chance of mobilizing those people when you need them.
   Even when it comes to politics, to get messages across to voters, one has to resort to the tried and trusted techniques of branding and marketing.
   There are few in the present generations who will, as many bloggers do, investigate someone’s voting record or dig deeply into their histories. It would be nice to say that presidents are not elected based on how much excitement they can generate. Or that we should place greater emphasis on other qualities like honour and sincerity.
   While some might point to exceptions, such as the Tory victory in the UK of 1992, I beg to differ. That campaign was hard fought by the Conservatives and depended on party unity—which was sorely lacking in 1997 when Tony Blair was elected. The National victory in New Zealand of 1990 was a result of the cry for change and the belief that Labour was leaderless.
   And the cry for change is such a powerful message in politics, because politicians understand our nature: even the vaguest change is better than the strongest, best defined policies if a party has been in power for too long.
   Labour in the UK in 1997, National in New Zealand in 1990, Labour in New Zealand in 1999, Clinton in 1992—all these are examples of that message. And that, too, “excites”.
   Sen. McCain should not pursue an excitement route himself, but he should capitalize on mistakes that the Obama campaign is making with greater regularity. The New Yorker gaffe—where Sen. Obama felt the need to comment rather than appear presidential and above satire—was an opportunity missed. Meanwhile, I wonder if people appreciate the maverick, go-it-alone style of John McCain, which plays well in the Senate, but could be symptomatic of future Cabinet divisiveness under his administration.
   A winner is by no means clear, and a week remains a long time in politics. Months, as Sen. Clinton will attest as she went from dead cert to second-best, are an eternity.

Finally, a celeb decides to extend a hand of friendship to beleaguered celeb Britney Spears:

http://www.rte.ie/arts/2008/0516/spearsb.html

   Mel Gibson may slag off Judaism and Jews when drunk but it is high time someone showed some kindness to Britney and her family.
   It’s a good move for two celebs who need a bit of a positive boost in the media.

Fred Thompson announced his candidacy for President of the United States, on Jay Leno’s Tonight Show a few nights ago.
   A great analysis appears in the Murdoch Press, where the conclusion is that the former senator from Tennessee stands a good chance, not because of his political views (closer to those of Sen. John McCain than his other opponents), but because he is a celebrity who looks the part.
   The Tonight Show audience in Los Angeles was delighted with Mr Thompson’s announcement, though it was noticeably silent when the Iraq war was discussed.
   Applause returned when Thompson noted that the United States had spilled a lot of blood for other nations’ freedom, an idea that still has resonance in that nation.
   This shows the division that must come in the US: a country known for defending and promoting freedom, yet tired of sacrificing its own in a war that its own President warned would be a lengthy, tiresome fight when he was campaigning in 2004. Yet Americans do have their pride in their history and what they stand for. And rightly so.
   For those torn between a pro-war and an anti-war position, which the one Tonight Show audience seemed to demonstrate, Thompson may offer a third way. Toward the end of his interview, he hinted that the War on Terror, under him, would have more allies: he would try to unite all the good guys against the bad guys. France was a powerful example, as Thompson cited how Nicolas Sarkozy, before his win in the Presidential Election there, came to the US to meet President Bush. He returned to France saying that he would be more pro-American. The French elected him.
   Sarkozy’s win wasn’t anywhere near that simplistic, but in the age of sound bites and people getting their news from late-night talk shows, it was a skilful move. In Thompson-speak, it means: let me get other countries involved so we don’t have to sacrifice as many of our boys and girls.
   It is a tricky third position to be in, but it may appeal to some voters who feel that the pull-out position of Sens. Clinton and Obama is unpatriotic at worst or risky at best. There is always a difficult ‘What if?’ that comes from any withdrawal, especially given that the US still holds the peace together in Korea with its base there, and maintained a lot of troops in West Germany during the Cold War—so why not the Middle East? Those who are internationalists may see a point. It will definitely appeal to the pro-war brigade.
   The staunch members of the anti-war brigade will not welcome Thompson, regardless of a third, intermediate solution.
   Nevertheless, this tact highlighted several things about Thompson: he is a gifted actor and once he was a skilled lawyer. (Lawyer-haters might not have a choice this time around: Clinton, Obama, Romney, Edwards and Giuliani all have practised law.) He has an image that has been fuelled by his Hollywood appearances. A southern accent makes one look down-home—and his choice of URL, fred08.com, also looks very personal. He knows how to use his words, and to use them well. All these ingredients make him a powerful opponent to the Democrats.

On the Lucire site in a few moments, but I thought I’d share it here first: Venus Williams launches a new fashion line called EleVen (geddit?), which will be on sale at an American chain called Steve & Barry’s. Maybe I am too much of a car nut, but I liked our Ford Verve video more.