What’s next for the Obama brand?

photo by distillerymedia

I was in NYC last weekend watching folks line up to buy Obama shirts at the farmer’s market and thinking about how all this is going to end. I’ve admired the brand, the way they have built it and managed it but I also realize that it’s not a “brand” that is probably going to last. Think how strange it would be to see folks walking around town in Bush 04′ tee shirts everyday.

As a voter in a democracy, I certainly hope that I’ll continue to be proud and affiliate with my elected official but will I wear his likeness? No, while I’m willing to do that during a campaign I’m far less likely to do so once they are actually in office…which is an interesting issue for a brand.

From a brand management point of view, it’s a huge opportunity to transfer the equities of the Obama brand into brand America both domestically and abroad. But that effort requires different tools than the ones that have been used to date: buttons, tee shirts, posters and hipster Obama belt buckles (although Joe the Plumber could probably use one).

I think Tina Fey is still more qualified to be President.

Watching these videos makes me cringe…

hat tip to The Huffington Post

Debbie has another good (not good) one over on her blog.

Because I’m not sure I deserve health insurance….

Free Advice: Repositioning Obama

Hope – Obama (Shepard Fairey poster)

Originally uploaded by Steve Rhodes

I’m starting up a new section of the blog here called Free Advice in which I will give advice to brands who haven’t asked for it. First up, Mr. Barack Obama.

It should be noted that I love what you are doing to date. Strong consistent positioning around HOPE supported by “Yes we can” making it feel achievable and believable. Short, simple, to the point and looks great on posters and t-shirts.

But it’s time to realize that these themes aren’t yours alone. We’ve wanted to BELIEVE and HOPE, since well before Bill Clinton came from a little place called Hope, ARK. We’ve also wanted to CHANGE Washington ever since Washington needed changing, which was pretty early on. You embody these themes making them ring out as resonate and true and yet they aren’t absolute positionings. They remain relative to the other candidates faced in the primary. In order to win the general election I think we are going to need a bit more information and you are going to need a positioning to coalesce that around.

Recommendation:
Keep HOPE as a messaging pillar but adjust your overall positioning to “Leadership for a Changing World.” You support this by continuing to create a leadership agenda, domestically and reasserting America’s leadership in the broader world.

It also continues to create a distinction between yourself and Mr. McCain while subtly reminding folks that he continues to mention countries that have been non-existent for a decade, can’t use a computer and wants to pursue many of the same strategies that got us to where we are.

Invesco Just Won the Election Lottery

invesco field at mile high

Originally uploaded by pbo31

With Barak Obama and the Democratic National Committee selecting Invesco Field as the host of the Democratic National Convention, Invesco just hit the jackpot. Granted, they might not want to be seen as political, but they’re certain to be mentioned thousands of times over the next couple months and featured prominently in the actual coverage of the event earning them a windfall of free publicity.

The loser, of course, is the Pepsi Center which was all game to get the coverage themselves. It’s a shame that Pepsi moved away from the “Taste of a New Generation” since it would have seemed so appropriate.

article here: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/obama-picks-stadium-for-acceptance-speech/

Obama Controversy Proves There is No Local Marketing Anymore

jesus & walther

Originally uploaded by chaos & career

Much ado is being made by national media about local marketing as of late. First it was Absolut’s campaign in Mexico that depicted the country owning half of America ‘in an Absolut world.’ National media (okay, Fox News) decried it as an assault on our sovereignty and folks started calling for a boycott of the brand all the while missing the point that no one really wants to live in Fresno and we might just want to give it back.

Then came the Obama fracas about how bitter Americans turn to guns and religion and rant about foreign trade deals. And despite his likely correctness on the issue, it isn’t something that one would want to come out and say as Pennsylvania and Indiana gear up for their primaries. Unless of course you were in San Francisco giving a campaign fundraising speech that was closed to the media. Because in San Francisco people are likely to agree with you.

Both of these cases point to the new difficulties of local marketing and delivering messages based upon segmented consumer sentiment. In the local markets where both those messages ran, it signaled clear strategic intent to align with the feelings of the market. But when those messages become national, or global as they are tending to do, they wreak havoc. This is especially relevant for advertisers who use digital media and broadcast to the “world wide” web.

Answers are short on how to move forward. Alienating national audiences is a road to disaster and but marketers (conventional and political) can’t ignore the need to connect to local constituencies in relevant ways. For local brands, creating controversy can be a way to get noticed following a strategy of “who cares that people are talking about you as long as they are talking” since local brands tend to suffer most from lack of awareness. For substantial brands like Absolut and Obama, more care needs to be paid to how local messages will play out in the national media… since as of late there is no such thing as local anymore.