personal brands
Posted by Abe Sauer on April 5, 2010 01:51 PM
What's the difference between a one-term politician hockey mom and a millionaire media brand? The answer is not lipstick. It is branding. While Sarah Palin may not have a deep grasp of legislation or an impressive understanding of international affairs, it is now clear she is a master brander.
Palin has taken a loose set of identifying characteristics and molded them into a wildly marketable brand. She has done this using the simplest lessons from Branding 101. However, is she missing one brand value vital to permanent success?
In a piece titled "How Sarah Palin Became a Brand," The New York Times notes, "After her failed bid for the vice presidency, she was more or less told to head back to Alaska to serve out her term as governor — a kind of metaphorical kitchen." Of course, Palin didn't go back. Instead, she quit her job and began the process of turning herself into a "one-woman national media empire," releasing a book, touring the nation as a speaker, and now hosting a Fox News show.
Palin owes her brand strength to a fundamental branding tactic known as first-mover advantage. After the Republicans lost the 2008 elections, Palin was one of the first to strongly embrace the rising Tea Party movement. In this move she was the first into market. She backed up her first-mover advantage with solid brand messaging that took a clear position and defined her brand in the mind of her target consumer. As the Tea Party movement built up momentum, Palin wisely repositioned her brand to reflect changes in this consumer market. Soon she had made herself the voice of many in the movement.
Soon other Republican politicians began to follow her cue and embrace the Tea Party. However, as often occurs in many markets, these latecomers attempted to duplicate the most popular characteristics of the market leader's (Palin's) brand. This cemented Palin as the market leader. As The New York Times says, the strength of her brand position now protects her from criticism and, "disapproval seems to further cement the support of her loyalists. Ms. Palin may or may not be qualified to represent America around the world, but she certainly represents vast swaths of the American public and has a lucrative new career to show for it."
However, the one simple branding element that may elude the Palin brand, and eventually lead to its erosion, is long-term perspective. Brands that want longevity must continually reinvest and stress customer awareness and loyalty. When the tea party movement sputters, and it certainly will if the economy picks up or the Republicans regain power, will the Palin brand be ahead of the curve? Brands that want long-term strength usually are challenged to sacrifice some short-term profit. Does Palin have the necessary characteristics to assure such brand longevity?
| Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | FAQ 
