The Branding of Obama

2
Comments

I’m writing this on Election Eve. The votes are still being calculated, but this is how sure I am that Obama will win (and if not I’ll pull this post before it gets published. In the event you’re reading this and Obama didn’t win, I must have drank away my sorrows and passed out before I could pull the post).

Florida hasn’t even been declared yet (don’t get me started; I’m biting my nails that we can pull through and get our sh#5 straight this go ’round).

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about Obama as a brand. You see t-shirts that say “Obama Mama.” You see “Change” bumper stickers and signs everywhere. Will it go away once he’s president? Will we embrace a president that is a brand? Or as my hub says, a rock star?

Clinton was a rock star/brand in his own way. He showed us that all presidents aren’t stuffy white guys. Some play the sax (and have affairs but that’s a different brand altogether). But social media has propelled Obama to a level of brand never before seen. Everyone on Facebook and Twitter is talking about the election. Not just intellectuals. 18 year olds. Moms. Plumbers. Electricians. Everyone.

And they’re picking sides. But with Obama, it’s not just picking sides, like in a presidential election. It’s like picking a brand: Coke or Pepsi (or rather, old, flat Pepsi). You’re saying something about who you are when you proudly say you support Obama. It says you’re:

  • hip
  • liberal
  • open-minded
  • creative
  • have a sense of humor

I’m interested to see how far he carries the brand in his politics. Or how far we carry it in support of him.

Viva Obama!

Subscribe for Free Updates

Subscribe Via Email Subscribe Via RSS

Comments

1. On November 20th, 2008 at 12:36 pm, charityslave said:

I’m not in the advertising or marketing industry, but I do have a few thoughts on the Obama brand.
Obama’s message of “Change” is one of the most successful examples of branding in political history. It was made possible by the intersection of pent up demand in the marketplace and an effective supplier.
On the demand side we had a nation that has had 8 years of extremely poor leadership and has an obvious need for new direction. The desire for change is at historic highs, as evidenced by Bush’s lowest ever favorability rating.
On the supply side we have a man who difference is obvious. His political affiliation, intellectual approach, tone of campaign, class, name, and of course, color are diametric opposites to the previous leadership. He literally embodies change. The medium is indeed the message.
The success of this branding became more and more apparent when Obama’s two main rivals attempted to co-opt the “Change” message. Hillary Clinton used two slogans, “Change we Need” and “Working for Change”, to little avail. And of course McCain’s “Change We Can Believe In” was also rejected by the voters. But here is another reason why this brand was so effective. Because Obama had relatively little experience on the national stage his brand turned this weakness into a strength. Unlike Hillary and McCain, he had no record to run against. He was new, unscarred, somehow purer. People did not have much of an idea of how he would lead based on his past record. But because they’re desire for change outweighed their fear of failure, voters embraced his message.
The McCain team attempted to rebrand Obama shifting “Change” to “the Other” with their “Do we really know who Obama is” meme. This allowed interent rumors to flourish (Is he a US citizen? Secretly Islamic? Radical? Terrorist? Curiously, they skipped “Liberal?” and went right to “Socialist?”).
McCain, or to be more precise, McCain’s advisers, attempted one last play to co-opt the change brand with the selection of Sarah Palin. Here was a funhouse mirror reflection of Obama. She symbolized change in that she is a woman, but was an uber-conservative anti-intellectual who espoused views that no major party nominee for nationwide office has backed for thirty years. She was colloquial. Familiar and different at the same time. Only the Republican true believers bought into this brand.
So what is the future for the Obama change brand? Barak Obama has built up an enormous reservoir of political capital through his shrewd use of his brand. Because the economic crisis has blurred the tradition roles of Republicans and Democrats, the opposition is amorphous and undefined. If Obama can take the initiative and be seen as successful in the opening months of his presidency, his mandate for change will be almost unprecedented. He will truly have a chance to place his presidency beside that of Lincoln and FDR. Now that’s change I can believe in.

2. On November 20th, 2008 at 12:38 pm, Susan Payton said:

Charityslave–
Thanks for the tremendous comment! I’m glad you “get it.”



Leave a Reply

Clicky Web Analytics ss_blog_claim=d2e15d10dc3a85a2660b3cafaf74694d