Everyone knew that Barack Obama stood for change. He had the perfect brand, and then he went and ruined it. The selection of Senator Joe Biden is a branding error of epic proportions.
Politicians, like big companies, are not immune to branding mistakes. And Senator Obama has gone and made the biggest branding error of all. He has decided that he needs to be all things to all people. Obama broke branding rule #1: Make a brand promise and align all your marketing with that promise. Never deviate from it. With the choice of Senator Biden as his running mate, the Democrat nominee broke his brand promise.
Let's look at some of the reasons stated for choosing Biden as running mate:
- His experience in office and foreign affairs
- He’s a white male with white hair
- He voted to authorize military force in Iraq
- He’s a statesman
- He’s Catholic
- He can be an “attack dog” on the campaign trail
Commodity Branding
Senator Obama is trying to make sure he does not miss anyone and in return he risks not standing for anything. It's akin to Starbucks' multiple branding errors. Starbucks used to be about coffee, tea, and the "third place" experience. Then they added music, movies & smoothies and became a beverage convenience store.
In effect, Senator Obama has converted his presidential campaign into a political convenience store. "Don't like what I have to offer on this shelf? Well, check out our Joe Biden section and see what we have over here." By not continuing to sell his change story, Senator Obama risks the commoditization of his brand. A commodity strategy, rather than one of differentiation, is a game that yields a short-term sales increase, but always devalues the brand in the long term.
The Democrat vice-presidential selection raises a legitimate question: Did Senator Obama really believe his own Change brand? If so, why not choose a running mate that shouted "change!" Doubt is a byproduct of changing brand strategy in the middle of your customer's experience. You leave people wondering about what they are really getting for their money (vote).
I'm not predicting gloom and doom for the Obama/Biden campaign. They have only one opponent, and John McCain himself has a cloudy brand picture. But Senator Obama has left the branding door open and it's up to Senator McCain to engage in astute marketing warfare.
See my analysis of the McCain brand here: Clarifying the McCain Brand
Comments Note: Please restrict your comments to the branding an marketing aspect of the Obama campaign. I've had to reject a few comments because they contained what I would consider political remarks.
Related information on Branding:
The Brand Promise
Branding Is Easy, Branding Is Hard
How Stereotyping Can Bring Branding Success (or Failure)
Let future articles from The Marketing Spot come to you: Receive by Email or
Get The Marketing Spot in a blog reader
5 comments:
Jay ... if Biden was an "off-brand" choice, who would have been an "on-brand" choice?
Remarkably, Biden also endorsed John McCain as the VP of the DEMOCRATIC ticket in 2004.
For all his talk of a mythical changiness, chalk this one up to "politics as usual."
@John - I am not a political pundit so I will not even try to name names. But I will describe the brand qualities of a hypothetical Obama change running mate.
- An outsider, someone who is not a Washington politician. Maybe not even a politician at all. A person from the private or non-profit sectors.
- No political party affiliation.
- A female
- Someone who has a shining example of how they implemented a paradigm-shifting change.
@cam beck - The McCain camp was quick to jump on that fact and immediately released the video of Biden endorsing his running mate's opponent.
I think that Jay's post -- and even more so, the comments -- illustrate another facet of branding which must be taken seriously: how mass communications mitigate a branding message.
The clip of Biden "endorsing McCain" is actually him paying homage saying he'd be proud to run FOR OR AGAINST him. And some people look at Biden's relative lack of wealth and extravagance, and say that's a good reason to call him the antithesis of a "Washington insider."
We hear what we want to hear. We filter through our own lenses. And branding gurus, many of whom work on political campaigns, are simply spinning things the way the target audience wants them spun.
Just to round out the debate, a question: if one looks at a running mate as a branding decision, it seems to me these candidates have illustrated two strategies. 1) choose someone who helps the candidate win the White House. 2) choose someone who helps the candidate RUN the White House.
Regardless of which side you land on -- now THAT'S a big branding decision.
Post a Comment