Tag: Political Campaigns

  • Why did you vote for THEM?

    The strength of political party’s brand largely depends on knowledgeable voting consumers who understand what the brand has to offer.  However, no matter what a person thinks about a particular party, everyone tends to come to an agreement that the strength of a brand can quickly collapse. If the party is viewed as divided or sending incompatible messages, their voter’s perception of the cohesiveness breaks down and credibility is lost.  Although, if the party is perceived as being more “exciting” and innovative the voters are more likely to pardon their misdoings.  According to Gareth Smith and Alan French, “as all political brands try to appear trustworthy and honest, transgressions pose a clear threat to political brand relationships.”  They also stress that the overall brand must satisfy their needs when it comes to “the competitive nature of the political market, the credibility, attractiveness and personality of its leaders, and the party’s perceived salience and credibility in fulfilling its promises.”

    A politician’s campaign for the Presidency is no different than a company marketing a product or service to a target audience.  Just like in marketing, it’s important for politicians to conduct research and gain knowledge about what their target audience perceives to be important and credible.  During the 2008 election, Brad VanAuken, author of Brand Aid, developed, conducted and analyzed a survey given to 100 people from 29 states on political branding strategies.  He hoped to gain insight into the personality traits often associated with strong and powerful political brands.  Through his research, he established two lists; the most desirable and the least desirable qualities for potential Presidential candidates.  Two of the most desired qualities for a potential President include trustworthiness and intelligence. On the other hand, two of the least desired qualities include using fear to motivate and supporting companies over people.  Political candidates should integrate these characteristics into their brand to appeal to their target audience.


    With the upcoming elections, politicians can take this study into consideration when developing a campaign to promote their personal brand.  It’s important to remember that consumers can make or break a political candidates’ chances of becoming our next President.  Candidates should do whatever they can to connect to their audience.  People feel more of a connection with a political brand if there is access to online interactions. Obama successfully created an online community to establish social networks to recruit and fund-raise among the local community. The Internet has become a means of relationships with its voters and will be of importance for the future political brands.

    “Political brands clearly face a challenging future with the only certainty being that old strategies such as the occasional re-branding and change of leader will be insufficient to address the core concerns that consumers have of them. As the world becomes more interrelated, nation states are increasingly unable to deliver on their promises to electors; electors who are increasingly aware of the brand’s attempt to influence them and less prepared to accept their right to do so.” –Gareth Smith and Alan French

     

    -Kelsey Bendig, Andrea Blanton, Brooke Keller, Brian Burch

     

  • A Good Slogan Can Go a Long Way

    A key ingredient to any election is marketing and campaigning, and election campaigns are in a league of their own. From an IMC point of view, candidates are just another brand.  The goal of the campaign is to inform and persuade voters to vote for them.  And although there are many different marketing methods and tools that are used in a presidential campaign, there is one strategy that seems to never leave a voter’s mind:  a slogan.

    Slogans are created to summarize the candidate’s purpose and goals in a few words.  Selecting the best campaign slogan is a pretty significant factor. This phenomenon does not only apply to political campaigns, but to any marketing campaign. Slogans should typically be short, effective, and to the point. If the slogan is effective, the public will be able to know what brand, or candidate, is associated with it. Examples of effective slogans include “Just Do It,” “Where’s the Beef?,” and “Got Milk?,” just to name a few, and of course there is our most recent example of Obama’s “Change” campaign.

    So what are some ground rules that one must consider before deciding on a slogan specifically for an election candidate? For one, it has to be relevant to what the candidate truly stands for. An example of this is the slogan for Mike Huckabee that states, “Faith. Family. Freedom.”What seems to be an equally important factor is to match the slogan with the current times. This means that the slogan should not just address what is important to you as a candidate, but what is important to the citizens at the time of the election. There seems to be no greater example of this than the slogan Ronald Reagan used in 1980 that read, “Let’s Make America Great Again.”

    Slogans may be short, but they are powerful and meant to represent the brand and what it stands for. When considering everything that goes into preparing a political campaign, something as small as a slogan may not seem very important, but selecting the right one is just another way to take advantage of improving your brand awareness and recognition.

    An Oldie But Goodie: Here’s one of our favorite examples of a slogan! It may seem silly, but you’ll probably find yourself humming the tune after you hear it.  Would a song like this have swayed your decision in the election?

    -Claire Dillard & Liz LaPuasa

  • Political Bias in the Media

    Campaigning for the 2012 presidential election has begun.  Republican hopefuls are working to convince voters that they are the right choice to defeat President Obama, while the president is trying to convince everyone that he should remain in office.  In 2008, the Democratic and Republican parties shared some of the same beliefs on certain issues, but had opposing viewpoint on others.  Democrats were in favor of requirements to hire more women and minorities, repealing tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, and removing troops from Iraq.  Republicans were in favor of three strikes sentencing laws, taking steps to strengthen the economy and more anti-drug initiatives.  Both parties were in favor of limits on political campaign funds, and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.  The sentences above about the different parties were straightforward and un-biased, but it is difficult to find such information from one source.  You must be very careful in 2012 while selecting the information you are going to consider, regarding the candidates.  Beware of the agenda setters!

    Certain types of media will tell you that the Republicans are money hungry classists who are only in favor of appeasing the rich, with the intent to modify tax laws in order to behoove large corporations.  Then, that same media outlet will likely show a documentary on the sub-prime mortgage crisis, featuring interviews with families in middle America who lost everything.  There will be a lot of content promoting public programs for the under-served, and illustrating the Democrats as the humanitarian party.  That media outlet selectively left out good points about the Republican party on purpose.  It is called agenda setting, and it is when the media controls the amount of exposure certain news gets.  The more exposure people get to certain types of news, the more important it becomes.  If messages about middle Americans losing everything reach you every day, it will become important to you because it will inadvertently be on your mind.  There could be a more pressing issue out there, but if it is not prominent in the media, how will you know?

    You may be fooled into thinking that all Republicans are overly conservative and old-fashioned, and that Democrats are big spending and incautious if you don’t investigate for yourself. With regards to IMC, each party tends to portray the opposing side negatively. This poor image can potentially end a candidate’s campaign. With this in mind, it is up to the people to figure out which issues are important and research them from both angles. Ultimately,  politics can be quite biased, filled with false information and one-sided opinions. When you vote in this upcoming election remember: you cannot believe everything you hear or see.

    -Stephanie Bakolia, Claire Outlaw, David Glaubach