Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Naomi Klein: Obama turned around America's image in the world

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 01:51 PM
Original message
Naomi Klein: Obama turned around America's image in the world
in this case, a progressive's own words are so much more interesting than the dishonest libertarian spin on her words.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-klein/how-corporate-branding-is_b_427406.html

(...)

The Bush administration's determination to mimic the hollow corporations it admired extended to its handling of the anger its actions inspired around the world. Rather than actually changing or even adjusting its policies, it launched a series of ill-fated campaigns to "rebrand America" for an increasingly hostile world. Watching these cringeful attempts, I was convinced that Price Floyd, former director of media relations at the State Department, had it right. After resigning in frustration, he said that the United States was facing mounting anger not because of the failure of its messaging but because of the failure of its policies. "I'd be in meetings with other public-affairs officials at State and the White House," Floyd told Slate magazine. "They'd say: 'We need to get our people out there on more media.' I'd say: 'It's not so much the packaging, it's the substance that's giving us trouble.'" A powerful, imperialist country is not like a hamburger or a running shoe. America didn't have a branding problem; it had a product problem.

I used to think that, but I may have been wrong. When Obama was sworn in as president, the American brand could scarcely have been more battered -- Bush was to his country what New Coke was to Coca-Cola, what cyanide in the bottles had been to Tylenol. Yet Obama, in what was perhaps the most successful rebranding campaign of all time, managed to turn things around. Kevin Roberts, global CEO of Saatchi & Saatchi, set out to depict visually what the new president represented. In a full-page graphic commissioned by the stylish Paper magazine, he showed the Statue of Liberty with her legs spread, giving birth to Barack Obama. America, reborn.

So, it seemed that the United States government could solve its reputation problems with branding -- it's just that it needed a branding campaign and product spokesperson sufficiently hip, young and exciting to compete in today's tough market. The nation found that in Obama, a man who clearly has a natural feel for branding and who has surrounded himself with a team of top-flight marketers. His social networking guru, for instance, is Chris Hughes, one of the young founders of Facebook. His social secretary is Desirée Rogers, a glamorous Harvard MBA and former marketing executive. And David Axelrod, Obama's top adviser, was formerly a partner in ASK Public Strategies, a PR firm which, according to BusinessWeek, "has quarterbacked campaigns" for everyone from Cable­vision to AT&T. Together, the team has marshalled every tool in the modern marketing arsenal to create and sustain the Obama brand: the perfectly calibrated logo (sunrise over stars and stripes); expert viral marketing (Obama ringtones); product placement (Obama ads in sports video games); a 30-minute infomercial (which could have been cheesy but was universally heralded as "authentic"); and the choice of strategic brand alliances (Oprah for maximum reach, the Kennedy family for gravitas, and no end of hip-hop stars for street cred).

The first time I saw the "Yes We Can" video, the one produced by Black Eyed Peas front man will.i.am, featuring celebrities speaking and singing over a Martin Luther Kingesque Obama speech, I thought: finally, a politician with ads as cool as Nike. The ad industry agreed. A few weeks before he won the presidential elections, Obama beat Nike, Apple, Coors and Zappos to win the Association of National Advertisers' top annual award -- Marketer of the Year. It was certainly a shift. In the 1990s, brands upstaged politics completely. Now corporate brands were rushing to piggyback on Obama's caché (Pepsi's "Choose Change" campaign, Ikea's "Embrace Change '09" and Southwest Airlines' offer of "Yes You Can" tickets).

Indeed, everything Obama and his family touches turns to branding gold. J Crew saw its stock price increase 200% in the first six months of Obama's presidency, thanks in part to Michelle's well known fondness for the brand. Obama's much-discussed attachment to his BlackBerry has been similarly good news for Research In Motion. The surest way to sell magazines and newspapers in these difficult times is to have an Obama on the cover, and you only need to call three ounces of vodka and some fruit juice an Obamapolitan or a Barackatini and you can get $15 for it, easy. In February 2009, Portfolio magazine put the size of "the Obama economy" -- the tourism he generates and the swag he inspires -- at $2.5bn. Not at all bad in an economic crisis. Rogers got into trouble with some of her colleagues when she spoke too frankly with the Wall Street Journal. "We have the best brand on earth: the Obama brand," she said. "Our possibilities are endless."

(...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes he did..thank you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Love Naomi & not Obama, but this is childish and one-dimensional.
Yes, Obama's team used "branding" to advertise and communicate. To say that all branding is sinister? That's comical and immature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. she doesn't say that
she doesn't say that any branding is sinister, let alone all branding. In fact in this article she suggests there is a benefit to some branding, for example the part I excerpted, about the image of the U.S. in the world. She also identifies some potential consequences of branding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. She wrote a book about it that is reactionary and one-dimensional
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_logo

"No Logo" is as juvenile and reactionary to a degree as "Shock Doctrine" is brilliant and important.

"No Logo" has many good points, all subsumed to a conclusion that is similar to Michael Moore's idiotic conclusion to "Capitalism: A Love Story" in which Moore extols FDR who saved capitalism by regulating it, then Moore contradicts himself (& FDR) by saying all capitalism is evil. Why not just go back to FDR's regulations that worked for 60 years?

If smart liberals don't point out these contradictions from Moore & Klein, despite their otherwise brilliant work, then who will?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metric System Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. That's undoubtedly a negative piece, with some backhanded compliments thrown in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC