The Importance of Brand Naming:
Brand Obama and Brand McCain-a Case Study
Not only was the 2008 pre-election season been a roller-coaster ride emotionally, for both the candidates and the electorate voters, but it's was historic and monumental for two big reasons.
The first is Barack Obama and the second is Sen. Hillary Clinton. Not only is the first time that Americans have picked an African American as a major party candidate, but it's also the first time a woman has ever run for the highest office in the United States.
In terms of how branding crosses all sectors, even human, and how important a brand and staying on target with a brand message (or business tenants/guidelines), this election is the quintessential playbook on how selecting a brand name, ideology, and how to make the two a symbiotic relationship to drive the brand.
This election, in particular, has caught the eye of branding and marketing professionals from both sides of the political aisle, along with a willing and ready media.
In an article entitled "The Brand Called Obama," for Fast Company.com, reporter Ellen McGirt reported the following:
"'Obama and Clinton make an interesting contrast in brands,' says Professor John Quelch, senior associate dean at Harvard Business School and coauthor of Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes for Better Democracy. 'Obama communicates that he loves people, and Clinton communicates that she loves policy.' Consider Starbucks, Quelch says. 'People love it for the experience, not for the specifications of the coffee.' Obama, through his inclusive Web site and, yes, his lofty rhetoric, reinforces the notion that everyone is included and that this movement is actually a conversation to which everyone is invited."
From the beginning, the Obama campaign has stuck with branding that evokes a warmer, fuzzier approach that has little to do with policy, but more to do with human emotions and understanding.
"Let's be honest. Barack Obama is not on the verge of clinching the Democratic nomination because of his policy positions--whatever his most evangelical supporters might tell you. If policy was all that mattered this year, Hillary Clinton would've won five or six of the last 11 contests instead of losing them all. When it comes to specifics, there's simply not that much space between the candidates," wrote Andrew Romano, associate editor at Newsweek, in a February, 2008 article entitled, "Expertinent: Why the Obama "Brand" Is Working,"
"But watching Obamamania over the past few weeks, I've become convinced that there's something more subtle at work, too. It's not just the message and the man and the speeches that are swaying Democratic voters--though they are. It's the way the campaign has folded the man and the message and the speeches into a systemic branding effort. Reinforced with a coherent, comprehensive program of fonts, logos, slogans and web design, Obama is the first presidential candidate to be marketed like a high-end consumer brand.* And for folks who don't necessarily need Democratic social programs--upscale voters, young people--I suspect that the novel comfort of that brand affiliation contributes (however subconsciously) to his appeal."
The Obama 'brand' was on-target with operationalizing their brand from the very beginning of his launch into the campaign, so much so, that Sen. Clinton began to emulate the Obama 'brand,' as "Obama" the product outsold her.
Now, it's a brand fight between Sen. Obama and Sen. John McCain.
Because of these momentous milestones, both the Obama camp and the McCain camp have had to find ways to keep their 'brand,' on target, without losing their original brand messages.Brand Naming: 'Yes We Can' versus 'the Maverick'
The Obama brand and Obama the person comes down to being intertwined with three words: "Yes We Can."
His campaign has stayed consistent with this branding, since he kicked off his run for the presidency in February, 2007, but he's had to stay true to those three words, as Brand Communication Strategist Pat Cottingham points out.
"Over the course of this long pre-election season the nominees have had to find ways to repackage their brand messages without losing their original brand formula. In Obama's case that brand formula was delivered in the three word phrase "Yes We Can". Which is essentially a call for hope and change to the American people," said Cottingham, in a white paper entitled, "Brand Obama or Brand McCain," written for the brandchannel.com website.
"Obama's challenge then became how to define this hope for change with "real meat" and answers that the American people are hungry for. How to take his gift for great oratory and bring the message home with bread and butter solutions to the challenges that people across the country are facing," she writes.
The McCain 'brand' in contrast, though labeling the senator as a "Maverick," has not found a single branding formula that has been consistent, throughout the campaign.
"Here are some phrases that the McCain brand has used so far "Change you can believe in", "Country First", "Reform Prosperity Peace", "Don't Hope for a better life, vote for one", "Courageous Service. Experienced Leadership. Bold Solutions," continues Cottingham.
"The McCain challenge was to distance himself from the Bush administration while casting himself as the maverick ready to confront his party and Washington with new ideas and reforms. This has not been an easy balancing act and his numerous brand messages are evidence of just how difficult this has been."
Brand Naming: Obama and McCain Logo Blitz
Sen. Obama's campaign has crafted a brand formula that encompasses the "Yes We Can" branding and identified it with the name Obama.
"The logo itself is a good jumping off point. The typical Presidential campaign logo usually features some variant of the stars and stripes. Beyond patriotism, they have no message. They are pretty much interchangeable between Republicans and Democrats," writes Patrick Ruffini, a republican online marketing strategist, on his February 13, 2008 blog entry entitled, "The Marketing of the President 2008."
"Obama's logo rearranges these patriotic elements into an emblem that distills his message to the core: the hope of the sun rising [or, Republicans, is it setting?] over amber waves of grain, with the novelty of the candidate's unusual last name reinforced in an "O".
He continues, "Unlike virtually every political logo in history, this one doesn't shy away from the glows and gradients meant to give modern corporate logos realism and depth. And like good corporate logos, this logomark can be disaggregated from the candidate's name, in the same way that the swoosh instantly screams "Nike" or the circular logos of BMW and Mercedes spark instant associations with affluence and prestige."
McCain's logos convey a totally different, yet uniquely part of the McCain 'brand formula.' His logos focus on his military service and the blue and gold of the United States Navy.
"The McCain Campaign chose a logo that comes directly out of his family heritage of 3 generations in the US Navy, as well as his war hero status political leader," writes Cottingham. "The colors of blue and gold are the US Navy colors, the star icon comes directly out a military reference found on many uniforms indicating rank. The McCain and US Army logos (far right) are traditional, proud, and derived from the military."
Her research took her to the Brooklyn Art Project. According to Cottingham, "The project created Visual Word Maps which reveal the campaigns strategy by the top words used. Then, these images were generated by an automated script using the RSS feeds from Obama's blog and McCain's campaign RSS feed. The more often a word is used, the larger it appears. The category clouds were created over at wordle.net which is a tool to used to cut to the core of what someone's really feeding you in their RSS."
The top Obama words included:The top McCain words included:
- "Yes We Can"
- Change
- Hope
- We
- One Nation
Brand Naming: Obama and McCain--Being the Brand
- Country First
- Safer
- More Secure America
- Victory
- Honor
- Service
Obama and McCain, with their respective branding formulas, have been received in different ways by potential voters/consumers, but are their branding formulas working?
In Fast Company.com reporter Ellen McGirt's article, "The Brand Called Obama," it seems that Obama is more adaptable to change in his brand formula, if needed.
"Obama has tapped into this adaptive-leadership vein by inviting voters in with his "Yes we can" slogan, then reinforcing it with attacks on the complacency and withdrawal from politics of many Americans, particularly the young. "Change will not come if we wait for some other person," he said on Super Tuesday, "or if we wait for some other time... We are the hope of the future." Marty Linsky, professor at the Kennedy School and cofounder of Cambridge Leadership Associates, is among those who've taken note of Obama's adaptive style. "Obama often proposes process plans that involve a trust in the community at large," Linsky says. The potential ramifications for business leadership are enormous. The cult of the imperial chief executive officer still reigns in most C-suites and boardrooms. But winning tomorrow's talent -- and tomorrow's consumer -- may require a dramatically different approach."
The Obama brand's focus has been from top-to-bottom, crossing all information and media platforms, including utilizing tools that were not around during the last two presidential campaigns: YouTube and Facebook.
"Social networking poses challenges for marketers, no matter what -- or whom -- they're selling. Traditional top-down messages don't often work in an ecosystem where the masses are in charge. Marketers must cede a certain degree of control over their brands. And that can be terrifying. (Remember that "I got a crush on ... Obama" lip-synched YouTube tribute?)," wrote McGirt.
"Yet giving up control online, in the right way, unleashes its own power. And more than any other "national product" to date -- and far more than any other presidential candidate -- Obama has tapped into that power. The campaign's secret weapon: a fresh-faced 24-year-old named Chris Hughes. Four years ago, he was at Harvard, helping launch Facebook with his roommates, kids named Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz.
"Just over a year ago, Hughes took a leave from Facebook to do online organizing for Obama. A history and literature major who did no coding at Facebook, he brought with him a mastery of the human side of social networking that has translated into real results for the campaign. Early on, when resources and credibility were in shorter supply, one insider told me, "We were completely focused on making sure that people knew on a very basic level how, where, and why to caucus in Iowa. And a local network, like Facebook, was ideal for that." It was a cheap and effective way to leverage supporters' personal connections."
This branding formula has worked for Obama, making his brand one of the people, one of hope, yet not focused on specific political ideas, per se.
For Brand McCain, it's been more of a murky identification both online and offline.
"A pair of market research firms in South Carolina polled voters there in April and September and concluded that if McCain's brand were a product, it would be part Ford pickup, part Wrangler jeans and part Timex watch," wrote Michael D Shear and Juliet Eilperin in their Washington Post article, "Marketing McCain (TM)
"His brand strengths were identified as: trustworthiness looks presidential, prepared for the job, has relevant experience," said Mark Newsome, a senior vice president at Chernoff Newman, which conducted the surveys with MarketSearch. "He's really resting his laurels on his own brand."
"But the firms also concluded that McCain's brand has weaknesses: a striking lack of warmth and personal charm. And Democrats insist that there are opportunities to attack the building blocks of the McCain brand, especially his assertion that he is a moderate."
Brand Obama's 'charm' also extends to his pocket book, as from the start of the campaign, copious amounts of money was spent on communications from a selected graphic font size for all posters, to the online branding blitz.
Erik Boehler is the author of Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush (Free Press, 2006). He worked for five years as a senior writer for Salon.com, where he wrote extensively about media and politics. Prior to that, he worked as a contributing editor for Rolling Stone. Boehlert has a bachelor's degree in Near Eastern studies from the University of Massachusetts and is a Senior Fellow at Media Matters for America.
In a May 13 article, he made the following observations:
"In fact, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign has won widespread acclaim or the innovative steps it has taken, from social networking and graphic design to successfully launch the Obama brand. "Barack Obama is three things you want in a brand," Keith Reinhard, chairman emeritus of the advertising giant DDB Worldwide, told Fast Company. "New, different, and attractive. That's as good as it gets."
"But Obama's campaign, like most truly national marketing endeavors, has spent an enormous amount of money on mass communications to help build his unique and durable brand," he wrote.
He asserts that Obama has relied on a specifically laser-targeted brand name and brand formula, created by the Obama campaign and steered by the Obama campaign. Obama has become integrated with the 'Obama Brand,' so they are seamless and one.
With John McCain, the branding formula hasn't been new, different and attractive, according to Boehler.
"With the often cash-strapped McCain however, all that heavy lifting has been done by the press, pro bono… can you name a single McCain television ad that solidifies his brand, or the ground-breaking communications approach that has become synonymous with his campaign? I suspect you cannot, because in terms of forward-thinking, creative marketing, McCain's campaign remains utterly forgettable. But what he does have is an entire political press corps doing his marketing and branding for him by incessantly tagging him as a maverick."
Brand Naming: Obama and McCain-Epilogue
Specific brand naming, and brand formulas are important, not only for products and companies, but for individuals running for public office as well.
Unless you, you company and your products are all aligned together in thought, deed and beliefs, branding to a target consumer audience will not be successful.
"The Obama campaign is not selling Obama. It is not selling a public figure with progressive political beliefs. It is selling Hope - and Change," says Patrick Ruffini.
"Most campaigns never get beyond talking issues. The sophisticated ones run on attributes in the foreground (cares about people like me) tied to issues in the background (a health care plan). The Obama effort seems to be something wholly different. The campaign and its marketing seems designed to evoke aspirational feelings that have virtually no political meaning whatsoever. This is what great brands do. They evoke feelings that have virtually zero connection to product attributes and specifications."
