MarketingDoctor.tv
Brand Winners... And Losers: Limbaugh and Obama
Brand Winners… | And Losers |
 |  |
The Marketing Doctor says:
Winner: Limbaugh
Loser: Obama
Folks, before I begin I want to make one thing clear: I’m not talking politics; I’m talking brands. More specifically, I’m talking about the kinds of basic choices that either reinforce a brand or damage it.
This week we’ve got a perfect example in the exchange between Rush Limbaugh and President Barack Obama.
We can call it an exchange because President Obama essentially responded to Limbaugh’s attack. He shouldn’t have, but he did. In doing so, an exchange was created, and a brand winner and a brand loser emerged from the fray.
The Winner:
Rush Limbaugh.
Limbaugh is getting a lot of heat for his comment that he hoped Obama would fail.
I’m not going to discuss whether what he said was right or wrong, or whether it was tactless… but the fact is, the statement was quintessential Rush Limbaugh.
Limbaugh built his audience during the opposition years of the Clinton White House. He knows his audience, and they do not want President Obama to succeed.
He also knows how to get headlines. In other words, Limbaugh was being true to the Limbaugh brand. He doesn’t need to worry about what liberals say about him (as long as what they say is decidedly negative). Liberals are not his Target Market.
Get ready for more of the same from Limbaugh. With a Democrat back in the White House, his brand is really in its element now, and he’s going to let it fly.
The Loser:
President Barack Obama.
President Obama is now under the microscope. Everything he says as President can and will be held against him. This means tough navigation ahead for even the smoothest personal brand.
Unfortunately, even comments that aren’t meant to make it into the media do, and that is basically what seems to have happened here.
President Obama made an off-the-cuff remark about Limbaugh at a meeting with GOP legislators and voila: suddenly we seem to have a personal conflict on our hands (when in reality, there isn’t one).
The President can only lose in this kind of fight.
The President is a man who did a remarkable job of not getting caught up in sniping or personal battles during the campaign. He must maintain this “high road” approach.
In a way, Limbaugh is a little like a court jester. His bread and butter is insulting the king for a larger audience that doesn’t like the king. If the “king” responds, he comes down to Limbaugh’s level, inevitably losing face and giving Limbaugh credibility. He creates a relationship where only a one-way street existed before.
Nancy Pelosi showed understanding of this dynamic when she recently said something to the effect that she simply doesn’t respond to Limbaugh. Mr. President, listen to your Speaker!
President Obama needs to get back to ignoring all his attackers, especially Limbaugh. At this juncture, the important thing for the Obama brand is to avoid repeating this misstep.
One other comment on our new President’s brand. Recent reports of his casual attire in the Oval Office are worth noting because they underscore how much scrutiny a president gets and how seemingly minor details become central to brand identity (like Jimmy Carter’s cardigan). Remember, Mr. President, the devil is in the details —no matter how insignificant you think they are.
Presidents are easily lampooned, and these details can become magnified until they seem to represent everything wrong with the presidency.
It is fine for President Obama to suggest change in the way he dresses and conducts himself in the White House, but he, like his predecessors, face the added challenge of not really being themselves while still having to be themselves.
In other words, he must be the President with all this connotes (including a certain formality and aloofness). The best presidential brands have played off of this tension between their own personal brands and the brand of President (i.e., Roosevelt’s fireside chats).
In the weeks and months to come, President Obama will need to find that balance between his brand and the Presidency.
And remember, it’s always easier when you keep marketing and branding in mind.
TODAY'S TANTILLO TAKEAWAY -
Never let someone define your brand for you. Avoid brand “arguments” that you didn’t start and can’t win.
This exchange was definitely positive for the Limbaugh brand, reinforcing what he stands for, but I'd say it was about neutral for Obama's brand - on the one hand he's lowering the value of his brand a bit by responding to Limbaugh, but on the other hand he creates a useful villain - someone who represents the politics he is against and people can unite against.
However there is one brand not mentioned that this is hugely damaging for - the Republican party. As you said "Never let someone define your brand for you", and Obama is defining the Republicans as sharing Limbaugh's politics, racism, etc. Limbaugh is so extreme that this is absolutely lethal for the bipartisan appeal that the Republicans need to generate to win elections.
I'm sure Obama knows this, which is why I think this was a deliberate strategy on his part. The Republicans need to realise this too and start to distance themselves from Limbaugh and not let him speak for the brand. Let's face it - Limbaugh's listeners are all Republican base anyway - the Republicans don't need to suck up to them any more.
Reply to this