The Rebranding of War

Spotted an interesting Brandweek article while on a blogroll stop at BrandNoise. Brandweek just learnt of a below-the-radar speech Saatchi & Saatchi CEO Kevin Roberts (of Lovemarks fame) delivered last March to an audience at the US Department of Defence on the topic titled above. Key point: to rename what is now known as "the war on terror" as "the Fight for a Better World" (yes, in capitals).

My first and strongest reaction: it's all utterly risible--I also suggest adding some floral motifs to the accompanying visuals! A few readings from a fine source of strategic thinking (such as Stratfor; disclosure: I' m a fan thereof) will convince any educated mind that the nature of a global power prevents it from fighting for a world that can be universally seen as 'better'. Besides, America's recent performance at coping with Katrina's horrible effects shows that reality can definitively undermine any such grandiose wording by exposing weaknesses and shortcomings that even superpowers possess.

Further down the article,  Roberts maintains that in this "fight for a better world"

in addition to utilizing the U.S. armed forces... America also needs to tackle poverty and disease.

One word to that: duh! It surely needs to really tackle those problems, at home as well as abroad. It's all long overdue, in fact. Roberts then

suggested that America seek to become as beloved a brand as Harley-Davidson or Apple, so that the country becomes a “Lovemark” for foreigners.

A wake-up call is sorely needed here, because a brand strategist that compares a nation brand to product brands in terms of loveliness has impardonably little knowledge of how complex and different the former type of brand really is. Moreover, this comparison contradicts Roberts' competitive appraisal of his own proposal:

It's certainly not version 2.0 of Charlotte Beers, who tried to repackage Uncle Sam the same way she did Uncle Ben's. Programs about happy Muslims assimilated into America just won't cut it.

True, but he does just that himself. Claims about America (or, again, any other global power) fighting for universal good are never going to be half as credible as those in which P&G's detergents make the world a cleaner, brighter place. Going for such a rebranding would mean, IMO, a genuine disservice to brand America and to the objectives of its foreign policy.

Comments

[Stefan]

That is true for all megabrands, be they part of an antagonistic pair or not. I have to admit I'm partial to what is known as the 'Western civilization', but that makes me be critical of it whenever I think it is the case, rather than apologetic. Here's a recent article on the same topic - it may be of interest: http://www.forbes.com/columnists/2005/09/21/us-branding-politics-cx_pm_0921brandamerica.html.

[Stephen Macklin]

Actually, if you look at a comparison of world sentiment toward America, and any debate about Apple vs Windows we've pretty much reached that level. Fiercely loyal fans and bitter detractors.