Running head: Political Branding 1

Consumer Branding in Politics:

A Comparison of Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama

Sarah Sonies
Candidate: MA Public Communication

American University
School of Communication

April 28, 2011

Political Branding 2

Abstract

The case studies included in this capstone are designed to compare and contrast

two succinct brands of politicians. This paper analyzes each candidate’s brand and sets

out to indentify validity in media comparisons of Reagan and Obama by conducting a

case study of their brands during the time of their election. To properly analyze Reagan

and Obama’s brands, political branding is defined based on the literature on political

branding. This paper uses qualitative research methods to identify, compare and contrast

key elements of political branding different elections. The case studies in this paper

identify the voter demographics to whom each candidate’s brand appealed and then

analyzes the similarities and differences the role of media and celebrity each candidate

used in their political branding process to appeal to the public. In the examination of the

use of media in each brand, it is argued that the use of social media has changed the

political branding process by giving the candidate less control over the message.

Keywords: political branding, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, consumer identity

Political Branding 3

Introduction

Consumer branding as a political narrative has always been prevalent in politics,

but has evolved over time with the advent of much more advanced technology and social

media. An analysis of consumer branding in political elections can provide insight into

how much of a candidate’s political success is based on their ability to enable their

audience to identify with them through a succinct commercial identity. In modern

politics, an understanding of contemporary consumer behavior is pivotal to building a

successful brand. A qualitative analysis of political branding as it applies to two case

studies is provided in this paper.

Political branding is the strategic use of consumer branding tactics in the building

of a political image (Scammell, 2007). Specifically, it refers to the tactics politicians use

to gain popularity and election. Political branding is not just the use of traditional

advertising, but is an all-encompassing marketing and image identity campaign

(Scammell, 2007).

Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama were selected for the case studies in

this paper on the basis of their succinct image-building strategies and tactics. Both

Reagan and Obama were able to brand themselves in a fashion that shows the use of

consumer branding in politics, or political branding. Additionally, both successfully

marketed their brands to voters of America. Reagan appealed to a more moderate sector

of middle-aged men and Obama appealed to the youth vote.

Reagan and Obama are often compared politically by the mainstream media as

two candidates who ran for president in similar economic environments and had the

ability to reach key voting demographics in each election. However, Reagan and Obama
Political Branding 4

are truly similar in their use of political branding to appeal to the public at the time of

their elections. Both Reagan and Obama shared the ability to utilize political branding

tactics to market themselves to the public. However, this study argues that many of the

additional comparisons of these two candidates by the media are too generalized. The

research was conducted to not only learn about both of these presidents’ brands, but to

analyze their similarities and differences. To best analyze consumer branding in politics,

two politicians who had similarly dynamic election years are studied.

The first part of the paper is a literature review that defines political branding. The

literature on branding explains the importance of branding by candidates in order to build

their base of supporters during their elections. Other parts of the literature review contain

a discussion of the use of branding tactics in politics as they apply to the case studies.

The candidates’ use of media to build their brand, the “celebrity status” that

surrounded both of these candidates and how those elements of their brands drew a

specific voting demographic are addressed within each case study as important elements

of each candidate’s political brand. The voting demographics each candidate’s brand

appealed to are examined to illustrate how each candidate’s brand appealed to such

different demographics of voters. One notable difference between the two men’s eras is

the uses and limitations of media; Reagan largely used television to build his brand,

whereas Obama had more advanced technology at his disposal and used social media.

The two presidential case studies provide a platform to study evident political branding

and the appeal of strong brands to voters.

Political Branding 5

Literature Review

History of Brand Usage and Implementation

The word “brand” has a history in the meaning of marketing (Jevons, 2005). The

Oxford English Dictionary traces the development of the word “brand” from the

Germanic word “brandr” which refers to the mark made by a hot iron, a usage first noted

in 1552 (Jevons, 2005). The earliest definition of “marketing” found by the Oxford

lexicographers was just after this date, in 1561, it is entirely possible that these two terms

were coined at around the same time (Jevons, 2005).

The modern usage of branding really came on to the scene about 30 years ago

(Crainer, 1995). The 1980s were the apotheosis of marketing, marked by the height of the

consumer-driven era (Crainer, 1995). Market research, spin, and advertising, all elements

of branding, were the key signifiers of marketed parties and candidates in the 1980s and

1990s (Scammell, 2007). The popularity of branding is caused by the rise of modern

consumerism and, in turn, the modern consumer. The rise of the brand is completely

aligned with the consumer activism of the 20th and 21st centuries (Scammell, 2007).

Consumers have a need to identify with a product image, and the 20th century saw the rise

of many consumer brands still prevalent today, such as Coca-Cola (Scammell, 2007).

Scammell gives four reasons for the rise of the contemporary brand. The first is

that recognition of a respected brand name translates into financial value; second,

growing distrust and skepticism about the efficacy of mass advertising; third, the

perception of increasing consumer power and new concerns for corporate social

responsibility; and fourth, consumer research, which insists on the importance of

emotional engagement in shopping behavior (Scammell, 2007).

Political Branding 6

The idea of branding has become more of a theory which is applied to cities,

nations and politicians by giving them a public identity through the use of consumer

branding strategies (Scammell, 2007). The increased use of consumer branding strategies

include accepting that branding is more than just advertising but encompasses a much

wider aspect of public relations, as it is important for public figures to build an image that

resonates well with the public through a more cohesive platform than advertising

(Scammell, 2007). Brands are used everywhere and not just as a way to sell a product

anymore because the theory of branding has become a way for a public figure to build an

identity to communicate to the public (Scammell, 2007).

Branding is the hallmark in the millennial generation and used by politicians in

image-building platforms. Politicians are encouraged to “consider themselves a brand”

and to use public relations strategies to appeal to the public (Scammell, 2007). Scammell

uses the example of Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to demonstrate this

process. Blair’s Labour party feared the party was becoming increasingly susceptible to

brand and outside criticism by “disaffected or apathetic” voters as the incumbent political

party for the past eight years (Scammell, 2007). Blair’s people employed a public

relations campaign through a consulting agency specializing in branding to help improve

Blair’s public image, which was modeled after rebranding campaign conducted in the

early 1990s by President Bill Clinton (Scammell, 2007; Needham, 2005). Blair was then

rebranded as a more “Mature Tony” by incorporating his youthful hope and optimism

with an older, wizened politician to appeal to wavering public opinion of him (Scammell,

2007). Blair consistently insisted on taking difficult questions from “hostile journalists

and audience members” to show that he was not disconnected with his constituency and
Political Branding 7

his willingness to consider himself a new brand helped him successfully identify with the

public in a positive manner (Scammell, 2007).

The complex nature of branding implies that branding is not simply a convenient

term for a marketing strategy and a fashionable term for image (Scammell, 2007).

Scammell argues that a good brand name for a company, candidate or product is very

necessary as consumers become more demanding and can easily relate to the modern

tactic of treating a political candidate as a product (2007). Consequently, all aspects of

brands, their definition, research, communication, and methods of economic evaluation,

have become increasingly sophisticated, to respond to demanding consumers.

The Meaning of Consumer Branding

Branding is the new form of political marketing (Scammell, 2007). A base

definition of branding is provided by Scammell as “in marketing, a brand is the

psychological representation of a product or organization: its symbolic rather than

tangible use-value” (2007). In image-building and marketing, the brand acts as a shortcut

to consumer choice, enabling name and image differentiation between broadly similar

products (Scammell, 2007). Brands are composed of loose sets of rich associations and

impressions recorded in the human mind in one or other sensory form (Chandler &

Owen, 2002). Brand imaging in politics appears to add a layer of emotional connection

that operates over and above the functional use-value of a product. Evidence of the need

for an emotional connection is provided in the rebranding of Blair, where he wanted to

connect on a more positive emotional level with the public to increase his approval

ratings (Scammell, 2007).

Political Branding 8

The American Marketing Association defines a brand as “a name, term, sign,

symbol or design which is intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or

group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of their competitors” (Jevons, 2005).

Scammell further defines branding as “the psychological representation” of a product or

organization” (2007). This definition implies that the term “brand” has more of a

symbolic rather than tangible use-value. At a basic level, the brand acts as a shortcut to

consumer choice, enabling differentiation between broadly similar products (Jevons,

2005).

The definition of branding has evolved over time, with alternative concepts such

as value enhancement arising, meaning that branding is used in image campaigns

(Jevons, 2005). The meaning of branding is dependent on how a brand functions in the

modern age of complex advertising and marketing of a product or organization (Jevons,

2005). The definition of branding can be flexible depending on the context in which it is

applied, such as for a product or a politician (Jevons, 2005). Jevons argues that the

expanded definition of branding has helped to facilitate the use of branding and research

(2005). The expanded definition provides widespread flexibility to the term because

branding has gone from being simply a consumer advertising term and tactic to a full-

fledged marketing identity strategy (Jevons, 2005).

Just as marketing is not merely the art of selling a product, branding is not

advertising (Jevons, 2005). Branding is continuing to increase in complexity from an

advertising tactic to a policy practice (Jevons, 2005). This use of branding falls into

political campaigns because essentially managers of all organizations are encouraged to

Political Branding 9

think as though they are handling a branded product instead of a product simply to be

sold (Jevons, 2005).

Consumer Branding in Politics and Why We Think This Way

Much of the literature on political branding has discussed the important impact

political brands have on a candidate in an election. In the consumer politics field, brands

are made up of a collection of values, ideas and associations, feelings and emotions that

come together to make up a coherent identity or image (Chandler & Owen, 2002). One of

the larger aspects of branding literature explores the meaning of the cultural significance

and identity of all brands (Chandler & Owen, 2002).

Brands, from products to politicians, are a major phenomenon of modern-day

society and have become very important in sociological and cultural terms (Chandler &

Owen, 2002). The message for a successful brand must be simple, visual and memorable

(Chandler & Owen, 2002). To be successful, brands need a certain “charisma” about

them, like a political candidate, through which a consumer has a relationship (Chandler &

Owen, 2002). Brands authenticate a product and as a cultural icon, a brand must be

cohesive (Chandler & Owen, 2002).

Branding is now used in many contexts, and is growing extensively. Political

branding is referred to as a “big business” due to its widespread use among politicians in

elections (Jevons, 2005). Politicians, pop stars, sports and entertainment identities all

have a form of brand identity and can provide good examples of branding in their image

campaigns (Jevons, 2005). The brand identity associated with many public figures

consists of their public image, marketing and public relations ability and self-preservation

tactics (Jevons, 2005). The use of consumer branding in politics is usually referred to as a
Political Branding 10

large-scale image-building campaign (Jevons, 2005). Jevons argues that a politician’s

brand is relevant and dependent on a successful public image and therefore relevant to

discussion (2005). Political branding has changed the use of branding from use in a

singular consumer context (Jevons, 2005). The modern use of branding in campaigns is

moving beyond the consumer goods industry that provided the incubator for branding

growth during the twentieth century; to being extensively used in political campaigns

(Jevons, 2005).

There is an argument that branding is a term only useful to the consumer

advertising industry. However, Lieb and Shah used consumer culture theory and other

cultural theories of branding to study President Barack Obama’s presidential run and

found that a successful brand is why his campaign resonated so well with voters in

contemporary United States culture (2010). Obama’s campaign found success with heavy

use of grassroots efforts (Lieb & Shah, 2010). Obama’s brand was genuine and appealed

to the public because the Obama campaign understood American culture; especially how

the youth culture consumes messages (Lieb & Shah, 2010). The power of the Obama

brand to personally connect with the public was demonstrated when Will.i.am of the

music group, Black Eyed Peas, produced a video where Obama’s actual words from the

speech Obama gave after winning the New Hampshire primary were set to music (Lieb &

Shah, 2010). The video was shot in a black-and-white documentary style and feature

appearances from various Obama supporters, showing the multi-faceted capacity of

Obama’s brand (Lieb & Shah, 2010). Obama’s messages were designed for modern

distribution systems, so that each message could be received in an individual’s personal

way, giving Obama an authentic brand image (Lieb & Shah, 2010).
Political Branding 11

Brands exist simultaneously at a cultural and individual level (Chandler & Owen,

2002). This is important when discussing political branding because so much of

identification with a politician or a political party is about the identification of culture

(Chandler & Owen 2002). To be successful, brands need a certain “charisma” about

them, like a political candidate’s charm. The voter or “consumer” then has a relationship

with this candidate much like a commercial production (Chandler & Owen, 2002).

Brands influence consumer behavior and consumer experience by directly influencing

consumer perceptions and opinion (Chandler & Owen, 2002).

Using Strong Visual Images and a Unifying Message for Successful Brands

Mass media plays a very important role in the branding process. In his case study

of Ronald Reagan’s use of television in The Primetime Presidency of Ronald Reagan,

Robert E. Denton, Jr., says that television has strong effects on image-building strategies

(1988). Politicians use the medium to confirm public beliefs, rather than challenge the

public to innovative ideals (Denton, 1988). National audiences require generic appeals,

predictable responses and an agreeable image which makes the political candidate appear

likeable. The ability of political candidates to utilize television well is directly correlated

with the positive image the public has of a candidate (Denton, 1988). A presidential

candidate’s image must be well-crafted because the public image of a candidate is

interchangeable with a candidate’s brand.

Television places great importance on individualism, and gives political

candidates the ability to craft an individual brand image to appeal to the public (Denton,

1988). Television has been a successful medium for this because not only is it a hot

medium, it also emphasizes the traits of warmth, articulateness, and style which results in
Political Branding 12

personal popularity, prestige and office legitimacy (Denton, 1988). Denton’s research

argues that a voter builds a relationship with a candidate, based on their impression of a

candidate’s image and brand (1988). A candidate’s use of television and other types of

media makes the brand of a candidate both relatable and charismatic.

Strong visual imaging is another important element in a politician’s brand. A

2005 study found that adults who viewed an advertisement with a positive and uplifting

message were more likely to be interested in the campaign and were found to be overall

more hopeful and excited (Seidman, 2010). The study was conducted in 1998 during the

Democratic gubernatorial primary in Massachusetts and also argued that in addition to

viewing positive and uplifting political images, negative images and threatening stimuli

made those surveyed more anxious (Seidman, 2010). Furthermore, people were more

interested in the campaign, more polarized for or against a candidate they previously

preferred or opposed, and more likely to vote after exposure to the positive visual and

aural stimuli in ads, but they did not pay any greater attention (i.e., recall) to information

about a candidate (Seidman, 2010).

Comparisons of Reagan and Obama

Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama have both been subjects of much

comparison in the news media, such as the TIME magazine cover article titled The Role

Model: What Obama Sees in Reagan, which discusses how Reagan has appeared to serve

as an inspiration for Obama’s policy rhetoric in the light of Reagan’s 100th birthday

centennial. It is argued that Obama emulated elements of Reagan’s branding, such as

rhetorical mannerisms that are very similar to “The Great Communicator” (Duffy &

Scherer, 2011). While they do not share a political party, these two candidates have many
Political Branding 13

similarities and differences that make them ideal case studies for branding comparisons

because of the parallels drawn between the two candidates during their first-term

presidential elections (Duffy & Scherer, 2011).

The media argued that the Democrats should use the Republicans as an example

of how to build a strong brand. Prior to the 2008 election, marketing experts predicted the

Democratic party would benefit from building a positive brand by studying the branding

tactics that Reagan used (“Dems Must Now Manage Brand,” 2006). Reagan understood

how to sell a brand (the candidate) to the consumer (the voter) (“Dems Must Now

Manage Brand,” 2006). In the wake of their sweeping win the 2006 elections, the

Democratic party was called on the aspire to better brand management (“Dems Must

Now Manage Brand,” 2006). To build on their win, the author urged the Democrats begin

to think as marketers by “starting with the consumer” (“Dems Must Now Manage

Brand,” 2006). Democrats were urged to build a brand by standing for positives rather

than negatives to be able to carry their “momentum” and win the presidency in 2008

(“Dems Must Now Manage Brand,” 2006). The article predicted the need for a candidate

to have a strong and positive brand to win the presidency in 2008, and Barack Obama

was that candidate (“Dems Must Now Manage Brand,” 2006).

Reagan and Obama both ran for election during sinking economies (Tierney,

2011). The media coverage has drawn many comparisons between these two candidates,

with TIME Magazine devoting the cover of their Jan. 27 issue to several enterprise stories

discussed how Obama found Reagan’s presidency as a source of instruction (Tierney,

2011). Other comparisons discussed in the media also lie in their experiences in that first

set of midterm elections. Reagan’s “revolutionary” agenda coincided with a historic

Political Branding 14

recession, massive employment and a humbling defeat in the 1982 midterms, whereas

Obama’s spending programs coincided with a historic recession, deep unemployment and

midterms that cost the Democrats control of Congress (Tierney, 2011). Both Reagan and

Obama have been faced with defeats in midterm elections and controversial

Congressional healthcare packages (Tierney, 2011).

Political Branding 15

Research Methods

Scammell said the process of conducting research on branding should be mostly a

qualitative process (2007). Scammell notes that “brand research is primarily qualitative,

seeking of necessity to delve beneath the surface evidence of quantitative polling”

(2007). The justifications for picking these candidates come from careful study and

monitoring of both literature pieces and various media coverage of both of these

candidates.

The research methods applied to this capstone are qualitative, using scholarly

journal articles and books as well as a qualitative analysis of the news media. The journal

articles and studies used for this study come from various scholarly research journals and

databases such as Communication and Mass Media Complete, J-Stor and Social Science

Journals. The in-depth case study of the Reagan brand and the Obama brand uses

information from the mainstream media, books and scholarly journals to compare both

candidates’ political branding strategies.

There are four research questions explored in this study

RQ1: What is political branding and how is it used in presidential elections?

RQ2: Are media comparisons of two case studies of political branding using two

presidents compared often by the media, Reagan and Obama, valid in light of the

comparison of their use of political branding in their elections?

RQ3: What were common themes of each candidate’s brand?

RQ4: How did each president’s brand in their election process appeal to key

demographics of American voters?

Political Branding 16

The studies and evidence are not only a brief narrative of the history, definition

and use of modern political branding, but also identify the constant elements found

throughout the research of the type of qualities that identify a successful brand. The

research of corporate and political branding examines both the positive and negative

points of branding, in addition to the process of developing a message and image that a

political candidate can craft into a brand.

Political Branding 17

Case Study: Ronald Wilson Reagan

Reagan’s Personal and Political Background

Ronald Wilson Reagan was the ultimate perpetuation of the American dream

(Canon, 2000). Reagan rose from a humble background to fame in a Hollywood acting

career followed by serving as the governor of California then with a two-term presidency.

Reagan was born to underprivileged parents, with a father who suffered from alcoholism

(Canon, 2000). Reagan went on to attend Eureka College after high school; where he was

known for his participation in many of the school theater productions and was described

as a “natural on stage” (Canon, 2000). After college, Reagan served as a sports announcer

in Iowa, which gave him the radio experience he would use to build his television and

movie career prior to his presidency (Canon, 2000). Reagan’s years in radio greatly aided

in the development of his language and vocal skills, giving Reagan the ability to make

reading from a script appear to be very natural (Denton, 1988). What helped him succeed

in his acting career would eventually give him the upper hand during televised debates

and appearances (Denton, 1988).

Reagan moved from acting to the political scene in the 1960s and got his political

start by publicly endorsing conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater in 1964

(Canon, 2000). Reagan then ran for governor of California in 1966 when he was 55-

years-old (Canon, 2000). He appealed to voters in the governor’s race and won by nearly

a million votes (Canon, 2000). Reagan was referenced as a good governor, but not a great

one; he skated by on his charm and negotiating skills (Canon, 2000). Reagan’s “theatrics

and cinematic visions” were better suited to him on a national platform than in California

(Canon, 2000). His eight-year term as governor led Reagan to aspire to carry out his
Political Branding 18

political agenda on a larger stage, so he perused the presidency (Canon, 2000). Reagan’s

presidential run in 1980 was his third attempt at running for president (Canon, 2000). He

was confident on relying on his advisors for directions and had a sense of his role in the

“production of the Reagan presidency” that led to the careful crafting of his image and

brand throughout the 1980 presidential election (Canon, 2000).

Reagan’s acting background enabled him to understand how to take direction and

follow a script, and he came across as “virile and Midwestern” in his popular appearances

(Canon, 2000). Reagan was the “wholesome citizen hero who inhabits our democratic

imaginations, an Everyman who was slow to anger but willing to fight for what was

right” (Canon, 2000). People who listened to Reagan tended to have confidence in him

and feel better about themselves (Canon, 2000). Reagan’s ability to present himself

publicly in this manner made the crafting of his brand simple for a person so accustomed

to a position in the public spotlight.

The Reagan Brand’s Demographic

Reagan had a visceral appeal to a generation torn between fast yuppie living and a

desire for a more structured America (Troy, 2005). Reagan’s call for capitalist prosperity

fostered the media-money culture that middle-class Americans valued (Troy, 2005).

Americans wanted to bury the 1960s and 1970s, and many baby-boomers became go-

getters who valued fiscal conservatism (Troy, 2005). Reagan’s brand provided a

reassuring cross between fast-living and common-sense fiscal conservatism that was

appealing to voters (Troy, 2005). This perpetuation of the brand of a “common-sense

fiscal conservative” gave Reagan the ability to attract mostly white, middle-aged males
Political Branding 19

older than 40 to the polls on election day. Many people embraced Reagan’s nationalism

because of its carefree, “wholly American” nature (Troy, 2005).

Reagan symbolized a completely new brand ethos of American politicians (Troy,

2005). Reagan’s brand represented the goals of many voters at the time (Denton, 1988).

Reagan made it possible for baby boomers to feel virtuous for criticizing the spend-thrift

ways of yuppies, revel in their fiscal conservatism and indulge in Reagan’s “common

sense conservatism” with his economic policies (Troy, 2005). The Reagan brand

symbolized a glorious America, where people should not only work hard for themselves,

but show off their hard work through their consumer purchases (Troy, 2005).

The element of branding and consumer culture in America emerged in full force

during the 1980s. The packaging of Ronald Reagan as the pivotal American candidate

had everything to do with the relevance of 1980s consumer brand America. In the 1980

presidential election, Reagan ran on a platform that encouraged consumerism, but for the

goal of American progress (Troy, 2005). Americans, encouraged by Reagan’s “gospel of

progress and prosperity,” happily indulged themselves in brand-name items and the

consumer industry (Troy, 2005). Shopping became an ingrained part of American culture,

with the familiar refrains of advertising jingles from beers like Budweiser uniting the

public and malls creating “homogenized, artificial environments” that helped franchisers

take over what had been an individually-owned “shopping America” (Troy, 2005).

Americans became intent on owning the latest, hottest and best brand (Troy, 2005).

The example of the launch of “New Coke” emphasizes how consumer and brand-

obsessed the 1980s were. The “centrality” of a soft drink to the identity of both New

Coke and Classic Coke advocates reflected Americans’ epic consumerism (Troy, 2005).
Political Branding 20

Americans who were once wary of large, “all-consuming” chain stores became “sale-

searching, trend-spotting, franchise-hopping shoppers” (Troy, 2005). The dawn of

Reagan’s America became the brand of Reagan in a brand-obsessed country. Reagan

took the perfect opportunity to package himself as a consumer product in the age of

consumerism.

To have a successful presidential image, one has to successfully act the role of the

president by illustrating a “macho presidential style,” which the Reagan brand illustrated

well (Denton, 1988). Reagan established the ideal of a “heroic presidency” by his

reinforcement of traditional perceptions of U.S. myths and values (Denton, 1988).

Reagan represented a complete brand package (Denton, 1988). The Reagan brand was a

person who was “competitive in politics and life; sports-minded and athletic, possessing

of an air of certainty that never wavered; unemotional; strong and aggressive; not weak or

passive; powerful; and a ‘real man’ who was never feminine” (Denton, 1988). Reagan’s

winning brand was successful because of its appeal to a nation that valued success,

wealth and a strong advocate for the American dream (Denton, 1988). The macho style

that contributed to Reagan’s brand gave him an advantage over other candidates because

it gave him a strong brand identity.

The Reagan Brand in the 1980 Election

The Reagan years paved the path for politicians to use distinct consumer branding

tactics in political elections. In the early 1980s, images of corporate brands were

everywhere (Raphael, 2009). MTV had just launched and became the ideal for complete

media-integrated branding and corporate sponsorship was a major factor in branding

cities to sports stadiums to schools. In terms of major political branding in 1980s, Ronald
Political Branding 21

Reagan was the “uber-brand” (Raphael, 2009). In the 1980s, Reagan offered Americans

the opportunity to help bring the world into focus (Troy, 2005). For some, it was the

miracle of America being revived from an economic recession, the fall of the Soviet

Union and the once “seemingly unassailable” Berlin Wall come down (Troy, 2005). For

others, Reagan’s vision represented a national aura based on personal capital that was

immoral, adolescent and dangerous (Troy, 2005). However, no matter the outlook, the

importance of the “Reagan generation” cannot be denied (Troy, 2005). Reagan’s vision

essentially represented his keystone contribution to the 1980s—a decade of “boom times”

and consumerism (Troy, 2005).

Reagan encouraged Americans to prosper and succeed, which served to boost

morale in a faltering economy. Upon accepting the presidential nomination at the

Republican National Convention in July of 1980, Reagan scoffed at the notion that the

United States was past its “prosperous zenith” (Canon, 2000). In the election, Reagan

defeated Carter with the battle cry of, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

(Canon, 2000). This slogan symbolized the high interest and inflation rates of the Carter

years and served as a negative rallying cry advocating prosperity and change (Canon,

2000). Reagan’s battle cry in the 1980 election built his brand of a reassuring, friendly

candidate who could be trusted to stabilize the American economy at a time of great

uncertainty (Canon, 2000). Reagan believed that America’s best days lay ahead and he

wanted to be the candidate to guide them there (Canon, 2000).

Political Branding 22

Television and the Reagan Brand

Reagan used mostly television to sell his brand to the people by making the

medium become the message, meaning that the reality of his image for public perception

was as how Reagan wanted to appear (Denton, 1988). The Reagan brand was so

successful because Reagan and his staff knew how to utilize television to build an

identity that was appealing to Americans (Denton, 1988). Reagan’s election is often

referred to as a “mass-media showcase in an era where presidential campaigns are really

a matter of which candidate has the best control of the mass media” because of how well

Reagan used television (Denton, 1988). Ronald Reagan was a master of controlling the

hot medium of television because of his ability to come across as natural, collected and

friendly on television (Denton, 1988).

Reagan’s use television was one of his main tactics he used in the building of his

celebrity image in his brand. Reagan fully lived up to his nickname of “The Great

Communicator” by being able to perfectly mold himself to his preconceived public image

through his use of television (Denton, 1988). Reagan had an advantage on television

because of his acting background, which greatly helped him seem appealing on television

during the 1980 election. Reagan’s career base captivated the American audience with his

television persona; his mastery of television was his foundation for his powerful “brand”

(Raphael, 2009). Denton said Reagan’s use of television was vital to his brand because of

television’s image-building potential, “those who win presidential elections are those

who fulfill the role expectations of the American public. And role expectations have very

little to do with political issues or policies. Those who win are those who perform best on

television” (1988).
Political Branding 23

Reagan’s use of television in building his brand was directly related to his

knowledge of the packaging of Hollywood (Tory, 2005). To survive in Hollywood,

Reagan had to project the necessary self-confidence to win the next role while struggling

with the actor’s insecurity that every completed job was his last (Troy, 2005). This

attitude helped Reagan in the 1980 presidential race because his confident aura that he

projected as an actor and celebrity showed off spectacularly when compared to his 1980

Democratic rival, President Jimmy Carter on television (Troy, 2005). When the two

candidates appeared together, Reagan’s welcoming personality radiated through on

television, especially during the presidential debates where Carter appeared “stiff and

morose” next to Reagan’s jovial nature (Denton, 1988).

Additionally, Democratic critique of the incumbent Carter administration helped

many Americans advance the Reagan revolution, an escape from the openness of the

1960s and 1970s, when people did not look kindly upon capitalism (Troy, 2005).

Reagan’s aggressive perpetuation of the American Dream of a friendly, but macho,

president gave Reagan superior media coverage compared to Carter because of Reagan’s

appeal on television and his fiscally conservative policies, which further encouraged the

public’s critique of the Carter White House (Denton, 1988). Reagan’s brand complied

well with a set and defined role of expectations associated with the presidency (Denton,

1988). The Reagan brand was a change from the free spirit, uncertainty and the frowning

on capitalism of the 1970s (Troy, 2005). Media culture in the 1980s perpetuated the idea

of the successful businessman by feeding the idea of the success of the business-oriented

(Troy, 2005).
Political Branding 24

Reagan’s brand also had an influence on mainstream television shows, which

depicted Reagan’s vision of America through their various plots (Troy, 2005). In the

1960s and 1970s, many television plots branded businessmen as corrupt or greedy foils,

but Reagan’s brand validated businessmen, with his values based on those of John D.

Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie (Troy, 2005). Television plots in the 1980s depicted

Reagan’s business and economic ideals through shows like Dynasty and the growth of

conservative organizations and periodicals (Troy, 2005).

The Reagan brand had a lasting effect on the popular culture of the 1980s by

inspiring a variety of television shows and movies designed on cracking down on crime

(Feur, 1995). The social problems modeled on television shows directed towards

Americans were intensely reflective of the popular frustrations across America and fueled

the “New Right engine” of the 1980s (Feur, 1995). Television shows like Hill Street

Blues and America’s Most Wanted aired for the first time during the “Reagan years” and

perpetuated “Reagan’s America” of wiping away crime and embracing American

conservatism (Feur, 1995). The generation of television dedicated to crime fighting and a

brighter, cleaner America is evidence of the lasting brand legacy that Reagan left on

America and American voters (Feur, 1995). The idea perpetuated in 1980s popular

culture of fighting crime and “protecting the family” represented the ideal norms of

American life and came from the Reagan brand that he identified to gain election (Feur,

1995). The Reagan brand defined a generation of pop culture, as well as a defining a new

generation of politics. The evidence of the generation speaks through the “educated

middle class” sector of America with whom Reagan’s message resonated greatly (Feur,

1995).
Political Branding 25

Role of Celebrity in Reagan’s Brand

An acting career ultimately molded Reagan’s celebrity brand. After passing his

Hollywood screen test at the age of 26, he moved onto what he felt was his true calling;

acting (Canon, 2000). Reagan starred in King’s Row and a variety of other films before

moving onto the public stage in the 1960s. His acting career and radio experience laid the

foundation for his future political image (Canon, 2000). His ability to give concise sound

bites, understand how to give a speech and deliver a punchline to a joke were all tactics

which gave Reagan the ability to build such a successful brand (Canon, 2000). Ronald

Reagan had a very succinct celebrity metaphor that accompanied his brand. Reagan

enjoyed the name recognition in the political scene that stemmed from his acting career,

even though his name recognition made other politicians wary (Canon, 2000). Reagan’s

celebrity background gave him ample opportunity to build a celebrity role in his brand

that would appeal to his target audience.

Reagan combined a glamorous Hollywood slickness with a small-town devotion

to the presidency, and helped to shift the terms of the debate and candidacy platforms in

America (Troy, 2005). Popular culture of the 1980s presented the public with many

“glamorous” stories, and “Reaganism,” or perpetuation of the Reagan brand, shaped

many of them (Troy, 2005). Reagan was able to make business authority seem glamorous

by presenting the rise of “Celebrity CEO” at the end of an era of “Nader-like” anti-

authoritarianism (Troy, 2005). Reagan was able to provide a certain element of celebrity

glamour to the political arena based on his strategic utilization of his celebrity experience

in his candidacy and business policies. Reagan’s acting skills, cinematic language and
Political Branding 26

orchestrated settings resulted in the election and reelection of one of the most popular

presidents in national history (Denton, 1988).

The role of celebrity in the Reagan presidency was carefully crafted by Reagan

himself and served as a reminder of his Hollywood past as a successful actor. Reagan’s

1980 election offered positive and idealized images which offered an indirect celebrity

appeal to voters that Reagan controlled (Denton, 1988). Reagan identified and welcomed

a heroic image about his celebrity; an image that espoused faith, God and country and

was surrounded with patriotism (Denton, 1988). Reagan’s role of celebrity was that of the

romantic, American hero (Denton, 1988). Reagan’s grace with which he accepted the

packaging of his image contributed largely to the success of his brand, which was also

facilitated by his celebrity background.

Political Branding 27

Case Study: Barack Hussein Obama

How Obama became the youth candidate and changed political branding with his use of

social media

Obama’s Personal and Political Background

Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 and was raised primarily by his

mother and his grandparents (Obama, 1995). Obama spent a margin of his childhood in

Indonesia before returning to Hawaii for school (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama then

went on to pursue his higher education with a scholarship to Occidental College in Los

Angeles where he began his career in grassroots organizing (Balz & Johnson, 2009).

Obama built his platform as a community organizer on the need for “change,” which

was very similar to his brand in the 2008 election (Obama, 1995). In the early days of his

community organizing, Obama responded to his college classmates’ inquiries about what

a community organizer did by “pronouncing the need for change” (Obama, 1995).

Obama said in first book, Dreams from my Father, there was a need for change

throughout the country and that “change won’t come from the top. Change will come

from mobilized grass roots” (1995).

Obama spent a majority of his early career years as a grassroots organizer on the

South Side of Chicago where he took on such projects as working towards a safer

Chicago public school system (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama then graduated from

Harvard Law School in 1991 and went on to work at firms specializing in civil rights law

(Balz & Johnson, 2009). He was also the first African-American to be named Editor in

Chief of Harvard Law Review (Balz & Johnson, 2009). In 1997, Obama was elected to
Political Branding 28

the Illinois State Senate and served until 2004 when he decided to run for national office

(Balz & Johnson, 2009).

Prior to his running for U.S. Senate in 2004, Obama was not well known outside

of the political sector (Balz & Johnson, 2009). He began to yearn for a bigger pond in

which to affect his political goals (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama first stepped into the

spotlight as a national political phenomenon when he was selected to be the keynote

speaker at the 2004 Democratic Convention (Balz & Johnson, 2009). In his moving

speech, Obama told the story of his own life and illustrated what would become his

signature message by urging the need for optimism and bipartisanship in government

(Balz & Johnson, 2009). His convention speech not only launched his national presence,

but also laid the presidential foundation for Obama’s brand of unity and hope for a better

future (Balz & Johnson, 2009).

Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention completely changed his

career path as he began to attract a substantial amount of national attention (Balz &

Johnson, 2009). He was referred to as the “star” of the convention and it projected him to

national celebrity status (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Throughout his time in the U.S. Senate,

even though Obama passed no legislation and gave no major speeches, he was treated

like a “rockstar” (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama’s public political activity was distinctly

helpful to his public image and much of his activity was built around raising his national

profile in the case of a possible presidential run, including making a trip to Africa like

many other presidential hopefuls (Balz & Johnson, 2009).

Obama announced the possibility of his running for president on “Meet the Press”

in 2006, making Obama one of the more exciting Democratic presidential candidate
Political Branding 29

possibilities for the 2008 election because of his novelty to the national political scene

(Balz & Johnson, 2009). At many of his public events and rallies, prior to officially

announcing his candidacy, he drew large crowds that were unusual for someone so early

in their political career (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama drew crowds interested in this

young, dynamic politician who was relatable to the American public. Obama’s personal

and political history has appealed to many Americans because of its “fairy-tale like” roots

(Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama’s history represents a classic tale of humble roots and

triumph over adversity in touch with community needs (Balz & Johnson, 2009).

The Obama Brand’s Demographic

Youth voters identified with Obama’s brand as fresh and new in a time when

many young people were yearning for a change in the American presidential system

(Balz & Johnson, 2009). To an American public open to new ideas and people and

susceptible to the political idea of change, especially in difficult times, many things about

Obama symbolized a sharp break from the past, which was one of the reasons Obama had

such widespread national appeal (Balz & Johnson, 2009). Obama saw hope in the young

voters of the millennial generation, defined as individuals born between 1977 and 1997

(Schulte, 2007). This young demographic was part of a large surge in youth activity in

politics around the time of Obama’s election, because of their strong opinions on the war

in Iraq and increasingly liberal views on social issues (Schulte, 2007).

Walter Shapiro, political reporter and former Washington bureau chief for

Salon.com, who has covered the last eight presidential campaigns, attributes the

overwhelmingly positive nature of Obama’s brand in the 2008 election as a way to attract

a young generation who idealized bipartisanship.

Political Branding 30

According to Shapiro:

The millennial generation … doesn’t like conflict, which is very much different

from the baby boomers. In fact, the millennial generation was such a perfect

target because younger voters were attracted to Obama because of the bringing

together nature of his campaign … as a consequence, Obama was always going to

do exceedingly well with voters under 30 years old (Personal Communication,

March, 23, 2011).

At the 2004 Democratic Convention, Obama’s speech, elements of which became

part of his signature brand, urged people to cease thinking of America as politically

divided. “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United

States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and a Latino

America and an Asian America—there’s the United States of America” (Balz & Johnson,

2009).

Obama’s appeal to the youth vote is reflected in the voting results for the 2008

election. The results pinpoint this targeted segment of voters, ages 18 to 29, gave Obama

the largest percentage, 66 percent, achieved for this group since exit polling commenced

in 1972. In addition, 28 percent of voters in this age category reported that they had been

to a campaign event in a “battleground state”—the highest percentage of any age group in

2008. The turnout by young voters increased in many of these states; with an estimated

one-percent increase nationally (Keeter, Horowitz, & Tyson, 2008).

According to the mainstream media, Obama also carried the youth vote in the

Democratic primaries. While enthusiastic Democrats of all ages produced a 90 percent

increase in turnout for the first caucuses, the number of young voters in the primary
Political Branding 31

elections was up 135 percent (Drehele, 2008). Obama’s appeal to youth branded him as

the youth candidate, which was reflected in the voter demographic results for the 2008

presidential election.

The Use of the Obama Brand in the 2008 Election

Obama’s 2008 election was the first consumer election, meaning Obama was a

consumer candidate instead of simply a candidate that appealed to consumers (Seidman,

2010). The Obama campaign used mostly positive visual designs to brand Obama, which

were designed in part to convince young people that he was inspiring, moderate and

unifying (Seidman, 2010). Many of the consumer branding tactics Obama used were

designed to appeal to this millennial generation (Seidman, 2010). These strategies and

tactics not only encouraged the millennial generation to vote, but were employed to

specifically gain their votes (Seidman, 2010).

The messaging in a brand must be consistent, and Obama’s brand was built on his use

of consistency in his marketing (Creamer, 2008). Obama’s brand was built with grand

gestures like ignoring “perceived ideals and norms of a target audience, a strong use of

social media and a consistent message” (Creamer, 2008). The strategies crucial to the

success of the marketing of Obama’s brand was the campaign’s understanding of ground-

level marketing (Creamer, 2008). Obama’s bold brand was considered to be a grand

gesture of the rejection of the former fears of the Democratic party strategy, which

assumed that red states could never be won (Creamer, 2008).

Through the networks that the Obama campaign built in 2008 through the techniques

of use of social media and message framing a so-called “Obama mega-brand” resulted

(Creamer, 2008). Obama’s marketing strategies resulted in a brand that was big enough
Political Branding 32

to be anything to anyone, yet had an intimate-enough feel to inspire advocacy that raised

funds at record-breaking, almost obscene levels (Creamer, 2008). The Obama brand gave

birth to a massive network of on-the-ground supporters who were so crucial in the get-

out-the-vote effort that added incremental Democratic ballots (Creamer, 2008).

Visual Imaging and the Obama Brand

Obama’s overwhelmingly positive brand as a presidential candidate was partly due to

his strong use of visual imaging. A good brand is something that is constantly unique

and identifiable, with which people can form a connection (Seidman, 2010). The visual

images of Obama’s campaign accomplished all of these things as a successful brand logo

(Seidman, 2010). The positive visual design tactics that Obama used in his branding were

built on the foundation that positive visual images would make a positive impression of a

candidate’s brand on voters (Seidman, 2010).

The visual images Obama used aimed to evoke optimism and hope among voters and

served to build Obama’s brand as the candidate for optimism and hope. The visual

images Obama used during the campaign, specifically the symbolic logo of the campaign,

the blue “O” which stood for “Obama”, and the red-and-white stripes which stood for

flag and country, became a part of this brand and were used on everything from the

campaign’s official Facebook page to the official t-shirts sold by the campaign (Seidman,

2010). Obama’s brand in the 2008 election was one of hope and excitement for change.

Obama excited the public’s imagination not for deeds already accomplished, but for the

promise of ones to come (Conley, 2008).

Consumerism and strong visuals were consistently intermingled in the Obama

brand in the 2008 election. During the Democratic primary season for the 2008
Political Branding 33

presidential election, the New York Times compared Obama and primary rival, Hillary

Clinton using their traditional image styles, each candidates use of new media and their

websites using the comparison of Mac vs. PC (Cohen, 2008). The New York Times used

the metaphor of a Mac computer for Obama to demonstrate how Obama was a “fresh”

brand (Cohen, 2008).

The New York Times analogy came from the Apple commercials with the young,

fresh-faced adult male as a Mac (simple, understated, yet ready to work) and a stuffy,

middle-aged gentleman who was “easily harassed” as a PC (Cohen, 2008). As indicated

by his website design, Obama was found to be Mac, showcasing Obama’s popularity and

successful branding as a fresh candidate easily able to win over a young demographic

(Cohen, 2008). Clinton was found to be a PC, showing Clinton’s traditional and

technologically simple ways of campaigning on her basic website (Cohen, 2008).

Obama’s website was labeled as more “harmonious” than Clinton’s, with plenty of white

space and soft blue palate that was easy on the eyes (Cohen, 2008). The design of

Obama’s website was simple but quite painstakingly done all the way down to the

taskbars, like Apple product packaging (Cohen, 2008). Whereas Clinton’s site was far

more traditional and used a conservative color scheme of dark blue with sharp lines

dividing content with basic, sharp, “cookie cutter icons” (Cohen, 2008).

“A candidate’s brand is something that is gently built upon and worked out with a

steady foundation,” but Clinton’s website contained too much of a brash “in-your-face”

technique (Cohen, 2008). Obama’s strategic use of visual imaging in his media tactics,

such as his sleek website, contributed to the distinct quality of his overall brand (Cohen,

2008). Both candidates were perceived as having relevant brands, but Obama stood out
Political Branding 34

with his youthful appeal and use of social media to build a dynamic brand, a broad base

of support, and young core of activists (Lieb & Shah, 2010). The comparisons of these

two candidates represented the importance and the ability of the Internet and new media

to brand a candidate.

Obama’s Use of Social Media in his Brand

The 2008 presidential election was the first time social media was used, other than

a candidate’s personal website, in the branding process of a presidential election and

social media played a significant role in the branding of all political candidates (Metzgar

& Maruggi, 2009). The Obama campaign utilized the audience-friendly element of social

media very well (Metzgar & Maruggi, 2009). The Obama campaign had such a great

success with social media because they were able to take more freedoms with their

control of the message through the use of social media, which was dramatically different

from the Republican’s use of social media (Metzgar & Maruggi, 2009). Republicans in

2008 were not prepared for the necessity of the widespread use of social media because

Republicans did not want to lose control of the party message, whereas the Democrats

were less concerned with message control (Metzgar & Maruggi, 2009). Social media’s

strength lies in its cohesive nature and lack of strict hierarchies, meaning campaigns that

do not have a significant desire to have control over their message are more likely to see

the benefits of social media as applied to their campaign (Metzgar & Maruggi, 2009).

Social media was such a crucial and successful aspect of the Obama brand because it

provided a platform for widespread social networking (Mangold, 2009). Obama used the

social networking theory, which asserts that people, or consumers, enjoy networking with

people who have similar interests or desires to their own (Mangold, 2009). Organizations
Political Branding 35

can manage the people’s desire to network by creating communities of like-minded

individuals (Mangold, 2009). The Obama campaign understood that people are more

likely to communicate through both word-of-mouth and social media when they are

engaged with the product, service, or idea (Mangold, 2009). This type of engagement

may come naturally for supporters of causes and political candidates (Mangold, 2009).

Obama used his online presence to gather supporters together, raise excitement and

provide information in a widespread, viral fashion (Mangold, 2009). Obama’s social

media strategies and tactics strengthened the Obama brand with their strong reach and

online marketing, which spread community awareness of the brand (Erwin, 2008).

The Obama campaign was referred to as “Obama brand evangelists” because of

how well they built Obama’s brand using social media, even though they exerted little

control over the message (Erwin, 2008). The Obama brand was free of control and

technologically advanced, which appealed to its target audience of young voters (Plouffe,

2008). The lack of message control worked well in the Obama campaign’s use of social

media (Plouffe, 2008). The Obama campaign’s email list was at 13 million people close

to Election Day, which essentially created an advanced version of a television network

that was able to move past television and communicate directly with no filter to a

significant number of voters (Pfouffe, 2008).

The Obama campaign did not invent anything completely new with its strategic

use of social media because it was built on the foundation of image-building and

networking (Carr, 2008). However, they added a very new element to building

connections by bolting together social networking applications in the form of a

movement (Carr, 2008). The Obama campaign created an unforeseen force to help raise
Political Branding 36

money, organize locally, fight smear campaigns and get out the vote that helped them

emerge victorious first in the democratic primaries, then in the presidential election (Carr,

2008). As a result of the use of social media, Obama gained not just a political base, but a

database, with millions of names of supporters who could be engaged almost instantly

(Carr, 2008).

Role of Celebrity in Brand Obama

Prior to the 2008 election, Obama became a celebrity in his own right, and gained

popularity among youth voters unparalleled by any other candidate in that election.

Constant media coverage, magazine covers and iconographic images, made Obama an

overnight celebrity (Park, 2009). Obama’s newness to national politics and his dynamic

nature built on this celebrity (Alexander, 2010). The celebrity role in Brand Obama came

off as well to the public because of the Obama campaign’s overwhelmingly positive

marketing (Seidman, 2010). However, the popularity that Obama generated gave the

Republicans an opportunity to take this celebrity role in Obama’s brand and attempt

make it appear as a negative aspect (Alexander, 2010).

The Republicans took advantage of Obama’s popularity and used it negatively in

a national campaign advertisement to make Senator John McCain seem like a more

dependable candidate (Alexander, 2010). The McCain campaign was wary of Obama’s

popularity and desperate for a way to make voting for this new, popular candidate seem

more like a risk than a venture. Obama had even had success branding himself as a more

military-friendly candidate than McCain, an Armed Forces Veteran, by visiting troops in

Iraq and Afghanistan in July 2008 (Alexander, 2010). The success of Obama’s excursions

threatened McCain’s popularity with the military, a development that would be

Political Branding 37

devastating to the McCain campaign (Alexander, 2010). The Republicans believed that

Obama could take the youth vote, but McCain should have his traditional target audience;

the military (Alexander, 2010).

Republicans were aware not only of Obama’s popularity, but his popularity with

young people. The McCain campaign’s advertisement portrayed Obama as a shallow

celebrity with no leadership experience to act as Commander in Chief (Alexander, 2010).

The ad played crowds from Obama’s campaign trail shouting his name repeatedly over

famous images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, with the words “he is the biggest

celebrity in the world, but is he ready to lead?” (Alexander, 2010). Branding Obama as

simply a “celebrity” and not an experienced politician in the campaign advertisement was

the GOP’s way of acknowledging Obama’s popular brand with youth voters (Alexander,

2010). If people saw Obama as simply an experienced famous celebrity figure, with no

real political credentials, then people would align Obama’s brand with youthful

celebrities like Linsday Lohan and Paris Hilton (Alexander, 2010). The McCain

campaign’s efforts to brand Obama as a high-profile, toxic celebrity with “hollow and

superficial travails” like Britney Spears, Hilton and Lohan was “dangerous” branding for

Obama, a candidate very popular with young voters (Alexander, 2010). This strategy was

designed to designate Obama’s brand as a “celebrity” candidate for young voters, making

him unelectable by other individuals of the population (Alexander, 2010). The idea to

brand Obama as an “egotistical celebrity” was an indication to how the overwhelming

novelty and popularity of Obama gave him a celebrity image, albeit not one necessarily

designed by the Obama campaign (Alexander, 2010).

Political Branding 38

The results of a study of public opinion of Obama after the ad aired were initially

skeptical, with the ad eliciting media attention but did little to affect public opinion of

Obama (Alexander, 2010). However, the symbolism in the ad made an impression; less

than a week after the launch of the “Obama celebrity metaphor,” seven out of ten

Americans viewed the low-budget, quickly produced advertisement (Alexander, 2010).

The “Celebrity” ad from the McCain campaign, while branding Obama as a celebrity in

the pejorative sense, actually had little effect on the Obama brand (Park, 2009). Obama

was still able to build his celebrity brand in a positive manner and was able to appeal

charismatically to his audience, which further appealed to his celebrity role (Park, 2009).
Political Branding 39

Discussion and Findings

The case-study comparison of political branding and its use by Reagan and Obama

argues that these two presidents had strong political brands at the time of their elections.

Reagan and Obama both understood the necessary means in which to successfully market

an image to the public. Both presidents had brands that were marketed to the public very

well in a time where voters were yearning for a change in the political atmosphere.

However, Reagan and Obama had brands appealed to two very different demographics of

voters, which suggests many of the comparisons initially made by the media were

overstated.

Obama and Reagan both had similar elements of consistency in their brands but used

different tactics and strategies to appeal to their demographics. The consumer branding

appeal that Obama and Reagan had to voters is a similarity between these two presidents,

but they differ dramatically in how they used political branding and the demographics to

which their brands appealed. The elements of this discussion include the relevant findings

in the case study comparison of these two presidents.

Voting Demographics and Political Brands

Media comparisons of Reagan and Obama argue that both Reagan and Obama

appealed to youth voters, but when their brands are examined, it was found that these

candidates appealed to two separate voter demographics. On Election Day in 1980, most

of those who voted for Reagan were middle class white males, those baby-boomers who

were exhausted from the uncertainty of the Carter administration (Troy, 2005). The

mainstream media reported that the hold Republican Party had on the youth vote in the

1980s was steadfast (Schulte, 2007). The political website, Real Clear Politics reported
Political Branding 40

that “as old as he was, Ronald Reagan was an aspirational candidate - the kind that would

naturally appeal to young people” (Canon, C. 2011). Additionally, Real Clear Politics has

compared Reagan’s voting demographic to Obama’s stating “the Youth Vote boosted the

Republican Party in the Reagan era, although Reagan won so big it was easy to miss”

(Canon, C. 2011). However, these findings are incorrect.

If the voting statistics from the 1980 election are further examined, youth voters

leaned more moderate and democratic and Reagan carried mostly the middle-age white

male demographic (Troy, 2005). According to national Congressional voting statistics

from 1980, approximately 60 percent of college freshman considered their political views

to be “moderate to liberal” and Reagan did not carry the youth vote (Stanley & Niemi,

1990). However, one similarity among voters in 1980 and 2008 were voting concerns. In

1980, a majority of Americans voters considered the biggest national concern to be the

economy (Stanley & Niemi, 1990). In 2008, 61 percent of voters saw the economy as the

nation's most important problem, about the same share as among the general public (Pew

Research Center, 2008).

The 2008 election saw record high voting numbers, which was very different

from previous elections. Statistics found that there were overwhelming numbers of youth

voting across the board. Young people between the ages of 18 and 29 cast approximately

22 to 24 million votes in the 2008 election, the third highest turnout since the voting age

was lowered to 18. (CIRCLE, 2008). The high youth voter turnout was attributed to an

increase in voter outreach to voters between the ages of 18 and 29, especially through

technology like social media (CIRCLE, 2010). The high voting rates, with their
Political Branding 41

technology outreach effort, shows the Obama brand was a successful marketing tactic to

draw younger voters.

While Reagan carried the middle-class, middle-aged vote, Obama was by all

means the youth candidate with a brand that was very appealing to young voters. Youth

voting numbers were very high in 2008 and many of those votes went to Obama. Young

voters favored Obama over McCain 66 percent to 32 percent (CIRCLE, 2010). According

to the Pew Research Center, 66 percent of those under 30 voted for Obama in 2008

(2008). Obama did have a strong hold on the youth vote, and examination of the branding

tactics and strategies Reagan used finds that Reagan did not appeal to the youth vote

nearly as much as Obama did; a striking difference between the two presidents.

Television and Social Media: How the latter changed the face of political branding

Reagan and Obama both knew how to utilize media strategically to build their

brands. However their use of individual mediums differed exponentially. Obama’s use of

social media gave his campaign the ability to reach many people at once and connect

with people whom they would not have necessarily connected to without social media.

The emergence of social media was after Reagan’s time, but was an asset added to

Obama’s campaign because of its widespread reach. The widespread use of social media

by the Obama campaign changed political branding by allowing the campaign to reach

many more people at once by taking control of the message out of the hands of the

candidate and placing it into the hands of the individuals.

Reagan had complete control over his media use in the 1980 election, whereas the

Obama campaign did not and was still successful in political branding practices. Image

control was of prime importance to every element of Reagan’s staff and Reagan had
Political Branding 42

control over every aspect of his image through the “medium is the message” element of

television (Denton, 1988). However, Obama’s use of social media actually gave his

campaign less control over the message; a move which garnered great success for his

campaign. Obama’s Internet team combined online enthusiasm with on-the-ground

mobilization by keeping their online communications open to users, which made

individuals feel a larger sense of involvement (Lynch, as cited in Thurber, 2008). In the

first days of the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama’s Internet team attempted to seek

control of a MySpace page that was independently created by an Obama supporter

(Lynch, as cited in Thurber, 2008). The campaign eventually conceded that eventually it

did best by letting a thousand followers bloom on their own with the use of social media

(Lynch, as cited in Thurber, 2008). It can be inferred that the use of social media gives

the presidential candidate less control over the message, and therefore less control over

the candidate’s brand. However, the loss of control does not necessarily damage the

brand as much as encourage audience participation in the political process. Obama’s

revolutionary use of social media changed political branding because it negated the

necessity for complete control over the message, and was still a successful branding

tactic.

Like Reagan, Obama also used the medium of television to build his political

brand as television is a prevalent tactic in politics, even with the increased use of new

media in the 2008 election (Seidman, 2010). The campaign ads were designed to solve

any doubts about his perceived heritage, and supposedly radical associations, focused

typically on one key issue or character trait of the candidate—or his or her opponent

(Seidman, 2010). The Obama campaign devised a number of spots that featured still and
Political Branding 43

filmed footage of his Caucasian grandparents and mother and World War II scenes at

home and abroad as a metaphor for his grandfather’s service in the military (Seidman,

2010). These campaign ads used strong visual images to brand Obama in a controlled

medium, which was still a part of the Obama branding process despite the use of social

media. These images were similar to the strong visual images used by past presidential

candidates but one large difference between Reagan and Obama’s use of television is that

Reagan’s use of television in 1980 was mostly to build his rhetorical technique and

personal appearance. Reagan’s use of strong visual images, like that of Obama’s in 2008,

did not appear in his television commercials until the “Morning in America” campaign in

1984, which featured spots that proclaimed “it’s morning again in America,” showing a

wedding, a family moving into a new home, fertile fields and employed construction

workers (Denton, 1988).

While Obama did use television in his campaigning, it was similar to Reagan’s

use in that Obama knew how to present his brand to an audience, but the control elements

in each candidate’s brand varied greatly, with the use of social media setting a new

standard for how much control was permissible to be taken away from the candidate in

the image-building process. Reagan controlled all elements of his brand via television,

where the media virtually became the message whereas the Obama brand worked best

when the campaign exerted little control over the message.

Use of Celebrity Metaphor in the Political Branding Process

Political elections are won and lost based on stances on policies, demographics

and finances, a candidate’s use of metaphor, ability to attain voter’s symbolic

identification of the candidates brand and the narrative in the candidate’s message
Political Branding 44

(Alexander, 2010). A candidate must strategically employ all of these elements in their

brand to have a successful election, and the role of the celebrity metaphor resonated well

with the Reagan and Obama brands. This study argues that both Reagan and Obama had

celebrity metaphor play a part in their brands, but the use of celebrity in each case study

was presented and received differently. Reagan and Obama both projected a certain air of

celebrity in which appealed to Americans and each was considered to be a celebrity in

their own right. This “celebrity image” also had a very succinct impact on their brands as

candidates. However the packaging of each candidate as celebrities was portrayed

differently in each candidate’s brand. The different element that the role of celebrity

played in each candidate’s celebrity election gave each a celebrity role to their brand in

their own right.

Reagan’s element of celebrity was very carefully packaged, much like the rest of

his brand, especially because Reagan was used to his name carrying recognition from his

acting past. However the celebrity element in Obama’s brand was a phenomenon of

constant media coverage of a candidate so new to the political scene. Reagan was used to

his celebrity appeal because he was a famous actor prior to his political life. Reagan

consistently referenced his Hollywood past and enjoyed the name recognition that

followed him into his political career and eventually his presidency. However, Obama

had a celebrity political brand because of his fresh appearance on the national political

scene and his identity as a youth candidate. Obama’s element of celebrity was

perpetuated by the media and by negative campaign ads which capitalized on the fanatic

media coverage and large crowds Obama drew to events

Political Branding 45

Limitations

The large amount of content available on Reagan and Obama’s marketing and

political strategies provided a challenge on deciding what specific elements to include.

The large amount of content related to this topic set limitations because the amount of

time allocated did not allow for all aspects of information to be included. In addition, it is

possible that the amount of information analyzed was too general in an attempt to be all-

inclusive, making the significance of the results rather minimal.

Conclusion and Recommendations

This examination of political branding contributes to the consumer culture field of

political strategy and political communications research by arguing that political branding

is a strategic image-building tactic in presidential elections. The study provides a

reference to two large-scale uses of political branding and aims to illustrate how two

candidates have used consumer branding tactics in politics. Reagan and Obama had a

great deal of valuable marketing tactics to offer to the public, despite the differences in

brands. The comparison of these two case studies identifies and analyzes three common

elements in each brand; the role of the media, their voter demographic and the celebrity

metaphor based on mainstream media comparisons of the two candidates but finds

various differences between the two candidates within these common themes. Obama and

Reagan did share similar branding themes that the media illustrates and the differences in

each brand show the changes in political branding over time.

The recommendations for further research are designed to build on the subject

matter in this paper. It would be ideal to conduct more research on branding to propose

how the Democrats could strengthen their brand further in light of expanding use of
Political Branding 46

social media in future election cycles. Further message testing of social media should be

done to see if there have been any changes in how an audience prefers to interpret a

message since the last presidential election.

It is almost the end of Obama’s first term in office and he has announced he will

run in 2012. This research area would benefit from analyzing Obama’s brand in 2012

during and after the 2012 election to see how it has changed and evolved since Obama

first ran for president in 2008. There is a variety of future research potential in the field of

political branding, especially with the widespread use of new media in politics. This case

study of the use of consumer branding tactics by Reagan and Obama can be used as a

historical reference of the ways in which political branding has changed over time and

how its use appeals to the public.

Political Branding 47

References:

Anonymous. Dems Must Now Manage Brand. 2006. Advertising Age. Vol. 77 Issue 46,
p18-18, 1/5p

Alexander, Jeffrey C. (2010). Barack Obama meets celebrity metaphor. Society. 47 ( 5),
410-418.

Balz, D. J., & Johnson, H. (2009). The battle for America, 2008: the story of an
extraordinary election. New York: Viking.

Cannon, C. (2011, March 25). RealClearPolitics - Youth Vote: Dems' Secret Weapon 40
Years in the Making?. RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and
Polls. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/03/25/youth_vote_dems_delayed_
time_release_capsule.html

Cannon, L. (2000). President Reagan: the role of a lifetime. New York: Public Affairs.

Carr, D. (2008, November 9). How Obama Tapped Into Social Networks™ Power. New
York Times, p. B1.

Chandler, J. Owen, M. (2002). Introduction: the nature of brands 2-24. Developing

Brands with Qualitative Market Research. Thousand Oaks, California.

CIRCLE: Preliminary CIRCLE Projection: Youth Voter Turnout Up. (n.d.). CIRCLE:
The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
Retrieved April 27, 2011, from http://www.civicyouth.org/preliminary-circle-
projection-youth-voter-turnout-up/

Conley, Donovan S. (2008). Virtuoso. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies.

5(3). 307-311

Creamer, M. (2008). Barack Obama and the audacity of marketing. Advertising Age.
79(42).1-55.

Crainer, S. 1995. The real power of brands: making brands work for competitive
advantage. Pitman Publishing. London, UK.

Cohen, N. (2008, February 4). Is Obama a Mac and Clinton a PC? The New York Times.

Denton, Robert E. (1988). The Primetime Presidency of Ronald Reagan: The Era of the
Television Presidency. New York, NY. Greenwood Press
Political Branding 48

Duffy, M. Scherer M. The role model: What Obama sees in Reagan. (2010). TIME
Magazine. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2044579,00.html

Editorial, (2006). Dems must now manage brand. Advertising Age. 77(46), 18-18

Erwin, J. (2008, March). Brand Obama was built to thrive on social networking.
Advertising Age. 79 (9).

Feur, J. 1995. Seeing through the eighties: television and Reaganism. Duke University
Press. Durham, NC.

Gelb, B. D.; Sorescu, A.B. 2000. Republican brands, democrat. Brands Journal of
Advertising Research. 40(1), 95-102.

Jevons, C. (2005) “Names, brands, branding: beyond the signs, symbols, products and
services.” Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 14 Iss: 2, pp.117 118

Keeter, S., Research, D. S., Horowitz, J., Associate, R., Tyson, A., Analyst, R., et al.
(2008, November 12). Young Voters in the 2008 Election - Pew Research
Center. Index of /. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1031/young-voters-in-the-2008-election

Lieb, K, Shah, D. (2010). Consumer culture Theory, nonverbal communication, and

contemporary Politics: considering context and embracing complexity. Journal of
Nonverbal Behavior. Springer Netherlands.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10919-010-0085-y

Mangold, G. Faulds, D. J. 2009 Social media: The new hybrid element of the
promotion mix. Science Direct. OI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.03.002 Metzgar,
Emily, Maruggi, Albert. (2009). Social Media and the 2008 U.S. Presidential
Election, Journal of New Communications Research, 4 (1), 141-165.

Needham, C. (2005). Brand Leaders: Clinton, Blair and the Limitations of the
Permanent Campaign. Political Studies. 53 (2), 343-361.

Obama, B. (2004). Dreams from my father: a story of race and inheritance. New York:
Three Rivers Press.

Pfouffe, D. (2009). Epilogue. The audacity to win: the inside story and lessons of Barack
Obama's historic victory (pp. 362-385). New York: Viking.

Raphael, T. (2009). The body electric: GE, TV and the Reagan Brand. TDR: The Drama
Review, 53(2), 113-138.
Political Branding 49

Seidman, Steven A. (2010) Barack Obama's 2008 campaign for the U.S. presidency and
visual design. Journal of Visual Literacy, 29 (1), 1-27.

Scammell, M. (2007). Political Brands and Consumer Citizens: The Rebranding of

Tony Blair, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science. 611 (1), 176-192. DOI: 10.1177/0002716206299149

Schulte, B. 2007. A Push for the youth vote. U.S. News

Stanley, H. W., & Niemi, R. G. (1990). Vital statistics on American politics, second
edition. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Thurber, J. A., & Nelson, C. J. (2009). How the Media Covered the 2008 Election: The
Role of Earned Media: Dotty Lynch. Campaigns and Elections American Style (3
ed., pp. 157-190). Westview.

Tierney, J. 2011. Reagan and Obama: Pragmatism Ascendant

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/01/reagan-and-obama
pragmatism-ascendant/70411/

Troy, G. 2005. Morning in America: How Reagan Reinvented the 1980s.Princeton

University Press. Princeton, NJ.