Ongoing Lessons of the Obama Brand
In October, I predicted that Obama’s use of the Internet and social networking would prove vital to his election; that the engagement of younger generations and the dialogue taking place online would catapult the youth vote front and center (even over the women’s vote) and offer a new way of managing a brand. Less than 2 weeks after the election, the media’s all over it.
In the Sunday NY Times (11/9/08), David Carr wrote about Obama’s Internet strategy dating back to 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/business/media/10carr.html?em. How, at the time, the proposition of leveraging social media seemed ridiculous and unlikely. Carr goes on to write about the campaign’s success and the implications of Obama’s social network resources as he turns to governing, “The juxtaposition of a networked, open-source campaign and a historically imperial office will have profound implications and raise significant questions. Special-interest groups and lobbyists will now contend with an environment of transparency and a president who owes them nothing. The news media will now contend with an administration that can take its case directly to its base without even booking time on the networks.
“More profoundly, while many people think that President-elect Obama is a gift to the Democratic Party, he could actually hasten its demise. Political parties supply brand, ground troops, money and relationships, all things that Mr. Obama already owns.”
It’s a fascinating discussion and one that reflects many of the conversations taking place in the marketing industry today. In brainstorming and strategy sessions, networking events and tradeshows, we find ourselves asking questions like whether companies will continue to need traditional advertising services, or how much of a voice should a company allow its consumers to have in its brand? Or, how do you engage consumers to participate in a conversation? And what do you do with that information once you have it? We’re asking the same basic question the music industry was asking just 5 years ago - will this [Web 2.0] be the end of our industry as we know it - how do we innovate?
But it occurs to me that perhaps we’re asking the wrong questions. We continue to ask how, will and what if. But a closer look at Obama’s campaign tells us his questions weren’t how and what if, but simply who and what - who is he and what will he ask of his audience? We keep asking questions about the medium and the mechanisms, but Obama’s strategy wasn’t about technology, it was about establishing a clear identity and then giving his core audience a clear call to action. By giving his supporters the opportunity to engage, let their voices be heard and offering a consistent brand promise - “change” - he established a winning brand. It’s a formula as old as marketing, but much like the politicians of yesterday, too often big business forgets to introduce itself and ask something of the consumer. Manners can go a long way.
But Carr is wrong. Obama will always need the media - to challenge, validate and keep his brand accountable. He will always need database experts to purge, build and ensure his constituency never becomes stagnant. And he will always need to manage his brand to ensure that his presidency, while transparent, is still his own legacy. If you ask me - that sounds like Obama still needs the marketing communications fundamentals. He’s just remembered his manners and brought them into the 21st century.