THE PROBLEM WITH MARCOS JR. REBRANDING

 

Movie scene inside a typical TV network station.

Interviewer (I): We’ll start in, what, 30 seconds? We good for 30? Thanks. Um…So, uh…

Studio Engineer (SE): Move your lav up just a little bit for me, if you please?

I: Move it up? Where is it? Oh, I got it. Is that better?

SE: Thank you.

I: Is… Is the sound for both of us good?

SE: It’s good. Thank you.

I: Okay. Right, well, um, when you’re ready, shall we start?

(Soft rock playing)

I: Jane, good morning.

Jane (J): Good morning.

I: Since your early days as a political strategist, you’ve been known by a certain name, Calamity Jane.

J: Yeah, I’ve been called a lot of names.

I: Did you ever work for a politician you did not believe in?

J: Oh, sure. I could convince myself of anything if the price was right.

Hired to manage the election campaign of a Bolivian presidential candidate, the TV show guest was Jane Bodine (played by Sandra Bullock in the movie Our Brand Is Crisis) -- an election campaign veteran operative of a political consulting firm that resorted to a strategy of smear campaigning (remember “lugaw”?) to make up for their candidate’s shortcomings (remember “duwag”?) – the dark side of the film inspired by true events in 2002.

Today, here and now in PH, we don’t just have another inspired movie but a sober reality that stares us in the face. It reminds me of Oscar Wilde’s essay “The Decay of Lying” where he opined that, “Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life.”

Whistleblower Brittany Kaiser of now-defunct Cambridge Analytica exposed:

“When I joined Cambridge Analytica in 2014 we had already worked in the Philippines. There was a national campaign where my former company had gone in and undertaken national research to figure out what was the type of persona that would resonate best with voters…

“We had a request straight from BONGBONG MARCOS to do a FAMILY REBRANDING [Underscoring mine]. This was brought in through internal staff at Cambridge Analytica and was debated. Some people didn’t want to touch it and there were others like our CEO Alexander Nix that saw it as a MASSIVE FINANCIAL OPPORTUNITY and asked us to write the proposal anyway. So, as you call it: HISTORICAL REVISIONISM [Underscoring mine].”

Brand and Branding are buzzwords in the business world – the former differentiates one product/service/organization from another; the latter lets the world know the brand exists, its sense of purpose, and its unique set of features. In the political world, each political candidate carries a brand ID – a powerful tool jutting out to attract votes.

In the US, during the 2020 Democratic Primary Race, Crowdspring, an online marketplace for crowdsourced creative services community of 220,000 designers picked out the top three best political brandings: Pete Buttigieg with his “A Fresh Start For America;” Bernie Sanders, “Not me. Us;” and Kamala Harris, “Tough. Principled. Fearless.”

“We know that a brand encompasses so much more than design. It’s also the words you say, the actions you take, and the impact you make on the people and world around us,” wrote Katie Lundin in her Crowdspring article.

But, why do a brand and a branding fail?

Trusted around the world, Volkswagen was the brand best known for its reliability, performance, and environmental compliance – until 2005. Equipping 11 million of its vehicle with software to dupe the required emission test triggered a shattering mess up. Consequently, not only had Volkswagen faced a 30-billion pounds lawsuit, but it also has dragged itself on an uphill climb to regain the trust of its customers it lost worldwide.

Another example of a wrecking failure was the British Petroleum (BP) pricey rebranding with a rumored price tag of $211 million plus an upgrade outlay of $125 million yearly. Deemed as a hoax, its rebranding claim deceptively type-casted the real nature of the company. Pulling the wool over the public eyes, BP projected itself as ecofriendly – a shoddy attempt that flew in the face of the oil drilling reality. A harsh indelible lambast evolved from that rebranding failure: You can’t put perfume on a pig.

The pivotal word – Deception. UP Professor Randy David’s pertinent insight in his PDI column on Marcos Jr.’s rebranding has been thought-provoking:

“There is no other way, I believe, except by questioning his suitability for the role into which he is being cast. Unlike the messianic figures in history, this man has never known any real adversity. His own father despaired over his laziness and lack of discipline. As far as the public record goes, he grew up surrounded by nannies, servants, bodyguards, and private tutors.

“Prior to joining the government, he never had to earn his keep. When he finally did, he neglected to pay taxes, as though this was beneath him. He has never been associated with any social cause, or with anything that transcends personal or family interests. He seems to have no affinity with heroism – whether real or invented.”

Built seemingly on the sand of falsehood and deception, is Marcos Jr’s rebranding, just like the Leaning Tower of Pisa, sinking?

Today it appears it may not yet be. But, Marcos Jr.’s abrupt shrinking from the “Tiger of the North” to the ”Hello Kitty” brand, exposed by his viral interview “cowardice,” may have started already to uncover the cracks on the façade of his rebranding walls.