A good brand persona creates opportunities. With the Philippine mid-term election process in full swing, it makes for an interesting exercise to observe whether or not those aspiring for political office will demonstrate good judgment in establishing themselves as the brands necessary to deliver clear platforms and intentions to the voters at large. A battery of questions can be asked of them. Start with, what is his (or her) single greatest asset as a political candidate? Is it a sterling record, servant leadership mindset, team play, productivity, charisma, empathy or individual intelligence? How does his persona reinforce his political brand?
What we are bearing witness to now is a battle of political brands. Most are expected to spend big bucks to buy advertising time and space to get themselves known, recalled, and preferred. Advertising is a powerful, albeit, expensive, implement in generating the desired result. There are those who use the supremacy of advertising early on, while there are those who procrastinate, only to play catch-up in the last few weeks of the campaign period.
Visibility is the trademark of political campaigning, hugely manifested in numerous candidates’ merchandising tactics. Without a doubt, branding reinforced by the magic of advertising and sustained media presence will be key in capturing a coveted Senate seat.
As you get hit by the advertising taglines of wannabe senators and congressmen, several questions should cross your mind as you watch: What is the image being projected? What aspects of the candidate’s communication are most compelling? How do the respective ads score in terms of clarity, relevance and interest?
The answers to these queries can be compared and cross — tabulated to see who among them stands out. The list of mental questions may initially appear too cerebral or scientific, but that’s how the evaluation should go. There is a fun part to this exercise though. Check the elements of execution – is the jingle viral, is the selling proposition unique and memorable, is the talking head sincere and credible, is the dramatization believable, is the overall mood and tone empathetic, is the brand character warm and connecting?
Some contenders are utilizing the “halo effect” of their established political names, making for numerous cases of the dreaded “dynasty”, family members all vying for office, regardless of qualifications or actual ability. Then there are the tandems: Brother-sister, an aunt-nephew or a father-son tandem can all be found on the upcoming ballots. It cannot be disputed that borrowed interest and the power of association are alive and well.
Then there are the celebrities.
Movie star candidates have individual trademarks, with their own particular brandings. More often than not, these will emanate from a combination of the candidates’ respective celluloid careers and (alleged) leadership experiences. They have the advantages of name recall, familiarity and experience, making for brand equity that can easily be translated to actual votes.
Good branding does three things for the frazzled electorate. It saves time, projects the message (rightfully or wrongfully) and provides an identity for individual contenders. To even the casual observer, branding lessons can already be gleaned from the initial salvo of political ads we’re being subjected to. Foremost among these is that everyone is their own brand and, just as with any brand, all the time and care taken to build it up is meaningless in the face of scandal.
Branding is all about your brand name and how you build, protect and nurture it. This coming election, be sure to make the distinction between those who just want in and those who genuinely want to serve.
Anything less, and you’ll have only yourself to blame, all the catchy jingles in the world be damned.
Words Bong Osorio
as it appeared in adobo Magazine’s March-April 2013 issue
