Marketing the politicians

With political parties busily promoting their brands in this General Election, how are they doing so far?

 The UK General Election of 2015 has been more notable for the  arguments over the staging of the televised debates than the core values the parties represent. It is a bit like the argument some decades ago of the peace talks for Vietnam where the shape of the negotiating table was the only topic for months. The first TV debate lined up leaders of the two major parties - Conservatives and Labour (note the previously re-branded "New" Labour has been dropped - plus the Liberals. To these three established parties were added UKIP's leader which as winner of the last European election in recognition of a new disruptive market entrant and the Green Party who had a single MP in the last Parliament. Then curiously leaders of nationalist parties from only two of the UK's constituent countries - Scotland and Wales - but none from Northern Ireland or England. The leaders' debates are important because the leaders have become the public face of their individual political brands. A bit like the role played by Sir Richard Branson as the personification of the Virgin brand. Three wealthy ex public school boys, university educated, career politicians, who could easily be inter changeable with each other but without the charisma or flair of a Branson. Then UKIP's leader who clearly is different and three ladies - Australian, Welsh and Scottish.

The 3 biggest parties held 94% of the seats in the last parliament - the Scottish Nationalists held just  6 seats, Welsh 3, UKIP 2 and Greens 1 -  less than 2% between them and fewer than the Northern Ireland parties. The TV  debates gave the niche parties a level playing field opportunity with the leading brands; a debate that the big players by no means dominated.

Meanwhile what of the target audience - the voters? Well first of all, the target market. With the two nationalist brands only contesting 15% between them of the total seats at the 2010 election there was a mismatch between the target market and target audience. In other words two of the seven did not compete in 85% of the market, but were given a platform to disrupt those who did compete in the total market.

Next a quick look at the product which traditionally is documented in the party manifesto - a series of promises for legislation in the next parliament. I suspect few voters buy, let alone read the manifestos and rely on news coverage for the 'elevator speech' - 30 second version. Big issues such as the economy,  the NHS, immigration etc are hardly differentiated in product terms and mainly disputed in costs of each programme which run into billions of pounds. The target audience has little concept of what a billion pounds looks like - a suitcase full of notes, a van load, more? And is more interested in how things work for them - getting a doctor or hospital appointment, buying an affordable home, decent education etc. There are no big ideas it seems, no real political ideology or inspiration, no Churchill with the rhetoric to translate into memorable words, Thatcher with the concept of a property owning, shareholder democracy, or for that matter Benn to articulate socialism. Apple's Steve Jobs created a desire for the company's products, not how much they cost. The leaders of the 3 old parties debate the nuts and bolts and costs.

So building a trusted brand comes down to the leaders being able to motivate the target audience - so far it is pretty dull stuff.

Media streaming and other technologies

Panelists positioned against the light appear in silhouette

At times it can seem that  technology solutions are ahead of the need for them and marketers are hunting around looking for ideas to utilise these new platforms and tools.

The Internet has been the catalyst for major changes in marketing, but for many this adds up to a company web site, email campaigns and dipping into the social network pool at best. There are lots more options for marketing content, often demanding their own share of the budget and some of these have already come and largely gone. Example. QR codes for a while appeared on ads in the trade press, bill-boards and even on products. Some still do. The technology was great for customers to quickly be transported from the media of print to the Internet and given access to masses of further information. And yet could people be bothered to switch on the app on their iPhone? For news feeds RSS was a great idea too and for a while was built into browsers, but outside the techie world is not widely used.  Then there is Blippar - the window to augmented reality. "We turn your phone into a magic lens giving you a whole new, interactive view on the physical world around you using Augmented Reality and Image-Recognition technologies." Podcasts and apps have been around for some time, so too webinars and streaming video. In fact a whole raft of new tools. But in the b-2-b marketing world are many people using them?

Last week one of our clients was participating in a panel discussion from a conference in London which was streamed live to an audience watching on the Internet. It raised some technical issues in my mind and some marketing ones as well. This particular example simply shot in the venue and clearly without the benefit of suitable lighting - participants sat in front of large panoramic windows, so appeared in silhouette. The biggest problem was transmission, but unlike buffering where the action pauses while the download catches up, parts of the presentation were skipped once the feed restarted. Technical issues aside what about the marketing value? Is the subject sufficiently compelling for your target audience to spend 30 minutes or more viewing? It seems to me this calls for more research before spending marketing money on them to discover the benefits they deliver and the value to your clients.

Political advertising - a shop window for agencies?

General Election campaigns have often provided  exposure for the advertising agency as well as the client.

Campaign - the advertising world's newspaper - describes the impact of the Saatchi & Saatchi poster for Margaret Thatcher's  Conservative Party, "It only appeared on a handful of sites, was backed by a minuscule budget and its imagery was faked. Yet it's fair to say that the 1979 poster for the Conservative Party declaring "Labour isn't working" was a game-changer." As with political poster campaigns it wasn't intended to be posted on every bill-board in the country, but to generate PR and news interest. It certainly achieved that, enraged the then Labour Government and did no harm to the advertising agency's creative reputation either. What the ad did was combine a cleverly crafted headline with a memorable image - a subtle play on words that was effective in communicating a single message.

Jobs are high on the agenda for the 2015 General Election campaign too. Politicians would have us believe they create jobs which in the public sector they may do, but in the private sector the best they can do is create an economic environment in which business can thrive. Here the strategy and messages get a bit mixed up. Business Matters reports, "Now that parliament has dissolved, speculation over the outcome of the general election is rife - and what this holds for businesses. The big debates seem to be dominated by the corporate giants who are getting a huge amount of airtime. But considering that one third of private sector turnover in the UK comes from small businesses, according to ONS, and that in 2014 over 99 per cent of UK private sector businesses can be classed as SMEs (Parliament statistics), it makes sense to place this debate in the context of small and mid-sized companies. Seeing as innovative SMEs have been praised as “growth engines” of the UK economy in the political arena, what can the incoming government do to reward and support entrepreneurship, and, in turn, further economic growth?"

The fact is that much employment legislation originates in the EU in Brussels, not the Westminster Parliament and this growing body of law discourages entrepreneurial start-ups hiring staff.  So instead a different business model operates - a network of small businesses and individuals providing services to each other. SMEs and micro businesses are equally concerned with tax, but unlike the big businesses and the CBI they do contribute tax, not avoid it. Not only do most small companies pay tax, but through VAT collect it as well. Most MPs and candidates at this election have never worked in business (or at all) tending instead to emerge from university, into a political research job and to become an MP.  Corporate big business through take overs and amalgamations - Shell and BG being the latest - are more likely to result in job losses, than job creation, so are these tax avoiding, job cutting companies who are not even voters the right people to woo?

Without a clear strategy of addressing the SMEs - where individuals do have a vote - we are unlikely to see ground breaking ads of the calibre of the 1979 one.