Prime Group

Well, the Democrats did it. They won control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate on a message of “we’re not them.”? But, as effective as it was in the campaigns, “we’re not them”? is worthless as a governing message or strategy. Democrats are now like the dog that caught the fire engine – they need to quickly figure out what to do with their victory. Now that they have saved the nation from the Republicans, they need a plan to save themselves from themselves.

They’re not off to a good start. Three days after the election, The Wall Street Journalreported that Democrats “vow to probe Bush’s pre-war case, Katrina contracts, and corporate America.”? Sounds a lot like “we’re not them.”? Then incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi decided to support anti-war activist Jack Murtha over moderate Steny Hoyer for majority leader. This was, well, stupid, as well as massively unsuccessful. Hoyer beat Murtha 149-86.

Next, Pelosi announced her support for Alcee Hastings over Jane Harman for Chair of the House Select Intelligence Committee. This despite Harman’s distinguished service as Democratic leader on that panel and Hastings’ having been impeached and convicted on multiple counts of extortion and perjury when he was a federal judge. This proved no more successful than her Murtha ploy, as last week she was forced to withdraw her support for Hastings.

So can the Democrats be saved from themselves? If so, by whom? Enter the “Blue Dogs”? – 44 moderate Democrats mostly, but not entirely, from the South. They tend to be social and fiscal conservatives who remain loyal Democrats while also working with Republicans when they think it serves the nation’s
interests. Blue Dogs may save Democrats from themselves in two important ways.

First, they are a check on unrestrained liberalism and potential abuse of power. They backed Hoyer for the Whip job and have announced their support for Harman over Hastings. And, on the issue of budget deficits, one in which Republicans have been particularly vulnerable, they have extracted a promise from Pelosi to fight for a pay-as-you-go budget plan.

Second, their willingness to forge bipartisan solutions while serving the nation could also provide Democrats a lot of cover in 2008 when they try to maintain control of Congress and take back the Presidency. Democrats would be crazy to take sole ownership of such controversial issues as an Iraq exit strategy, Social Security reform, and immigration. The Blue Dogs know none of these policies could survive a Presidential veto and, moreover, if they did, they might lead Democrats back to minority status in two years.

No doubt there will be many days over the next two years when Pelosi will be feeling a little “blue”? herself about the lack of unanimity within her party. On those occasions, however, she should thank the political gods for sending the Blue Dogs to save the party from itself. It’s time for Democrats’ to expand their message to “we’re not them… and, we’re not your father’s Democratic party, either.”?

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.

–Ecclesiastes

I was reminded of this well-worn biblical passage when my college-age son, home to collect his birthday presents, asked me the origins of the Quaker Oats man on the cereal box. Hmm. It is not as if he needed to demonstrate once more that the old man doesn’t know all things under the sun. So, we looked it up together in that modern source of all knowledge – Wikipedia. And what a great lesson in the ancient art of branding it turned out to be.

The “Quaker Man”? was registered as a breakfast cereal trademark (the first) in 1877 by the Quaker Mill company – one of the three predecessors to the Quaker Oats company (since 2001 a division of PepsiCo.). Why? Because Quaker Mill partner Henry Seymour came across an entry on Quakers in an encyclopedia (an actual book – how quaint) and liked the religion’s association with the qualities of “honesty, integrity, purity, and strength”? – just the qualities he wanted to be associated with his company and its products. Presto, a brand was born. Of course, if Seymour’s company had a little more “honesty and integrity”? he might have checked with the Quakers before hijacking their identity and its very positive associations.

What’s great about this story is that long before “branding”? existed as a word, concept or industry, clever business people understood what it was really all about – not just a name, logo, and tagline (Nike. Swoosh. Just Do It.) but the attributes that are or can be limked with that “identity.”? Furthermore, they (or, at least, Seymour) understood that brands don’t need much “literalness.”? So what if his company had nothing to do with Quakers and he, himself, was not of that faith? So what is there is no such thing as a “Quaker”? oat? And, today, so what if Quakers don’t dress like the Quaker Man anymore. With enough advertising, marketing, and merchandising muscle, a company and its products can “own”? an identity and its attributes and logic be damned.

In an interesting twist, Richard Nixon, the U.S. president often credited with introducing Madison Avenue techniques to political image-making, (read Joe McGinniss’ “Selling of the President”? if you haven’t already), made little use of his Quaker roots and faith to lay claim to the virtues of “honesty, integrity, purity, and strength”? but, then, maybe this just proves the wisdom of an old saying in the business, “You can’t brand shit.”?

“Do not go gentle into that good night…rage, rage against the dying of the light.”

– Dylan Thomas

“It ain’t over till it’s over.”

– Yogi Berra

“You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em.”?

– Kenny Rogers

When it comes to the death of a brand, Kenny Rogers may have offered more wisdom that Dylan Thomas and Yogi Berra combined. Brands – whether organizational, product, or individual – have life cycles. They are born, mature, and most eventually die. There is no shortage of experts offering advice in the first two phases – launching and developing brands. But few have much advice to give about negotiating the last phase. It’s an interesting consulting opportunity – becoming the Elizabeth Kubler-Ross of branding. Of course, many brands live into a ripe old age and some appear immortal. Coca-Cola is going strong at 120+ years. But other brands are forced into retirement or suffer deaths that can be quiet and dignified or violent and terrible. Remember Howard Johnson’s? (If not, ask your parents.) That iconic brand of the mid-20th Century fell from a peak of 1,000 restaurants in 1975 to three today. The various owners of the brand, including Marriott, Cendant, and Wyndham, managed its demise with reasonable grace. Efforts were made to re-position it and otherwise revive it but, in the end, the inevitable decline was accepted and the brand essentially retired. Other brands have figuratively or literally crashed and burned including ValuJet (whose Flight 592 went down in the Florida Everglades in 1996) only to reappear with new brand identities — ValuJet flies today as AirTran.

What brings all this to mind is the news that a personal brand that of Senator Larry Craig, died several weeks ago but no one seems able to convince the Senator of this. Rather than following Kubler-Ross’ stages of grief (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance), Craig seems caught in a perpetual loop of grief and keeps finding himself back at denial, anger, and bargaining. Someone needs to help him let it go. If not, we can expect a defiant book from him even after his colleagues and/or the voters of Idaho have forcibly retired him from public life. Like former CIA Director George Tenet, Craig is likely to take the view that “it’s not over until it’s over.”? Well, Senator, it’s over. Your brand – and with it your political career – is dead. This may be unfair but it is not reversible. When brands die, they’re dead and smart brand managers” go gentle into that good night.”

There is an old saying about something that is worthless…”?That and a dime will get you a cup of coffee.”? That old saying is only good today if the “that”? you’re talking about is a buck seventy-five. Of course that is for the “Grande.”? Maybe a dime could get you a “Small”? cup of coffee at Starbucks if there were such a thing but, as we all know, a “Tall”? cup is your smallest option.I assume that is part of Starbuck’s political correctness so as not to inadvertently injure the feelings of customers who feel “small”? or, God forbid, “short.”? Starbuck’s cup options, like the children in Lake Wobegon, are all above average. But, I digress.

What I’m really interested in today is what’s ON the Starbucks cup, not what’s in it. Being perhaps the most brand-savvy organization in the world today, Starbucks, of course, never thought of their cups as just containers. Sure, they make it easier and safer to drink the coffee than trying to drink from the tap but they are so much more than containers. They are little, sorry, “tall”? cylindrical billboards. On the front (if a cylinder can have a front) is the ubiquitous logo – the green circle with the pretty lady with long wavy hair, large breasts and a big crown (what IS she all about?). But that’s branding 101. The REAL branding begins on the back of the cup where, on my particular cup today, a musician named Dan Zanes opines in “The Way I See It”? that he envisions a “21st Century America where families, friends and neighbors gather together at the end of each day…to tell stories and jokes, to sing and dance with wild abandon.”? John Lennon couldn’t have imagined it any better. This is at least a brand hat trick if not grand slam. First, we have the message that Starbucks endorses and supports open speech. They want to help connect their customers with the trend setters and thought leaders of today. Second, we have Mr. Zanes, whose music I am unfamiliar with since he does not exist as far as iTunes is concerned, but who, I presume, is cool. Third, if you DO want to hear Dan Zanes’ music, you are told (on the cup still) to go to “Starbucks Hear Music”? on XM Satellite Radio. More cool.

By now, Starbucks is already way too cool for me. But, wait, there is more brand positioning to be done on this cup. Just around the corner we are told that the cup itself is “made with 10% post-consumer recycled fiber.”? I’m not sure what that means. Post-consumer is a little scary, even apocalyptic sounding. The “fiber”? part, I presume, is not nutritional information. Anyway, it reminds us that Starbucks is not only cool, they are responsible. A bit oxymoronic, but they seem to pull it off. So, at this point, Starbucks has done as much branding as any organization can on a single cup – even a Grande one. Now, it’s time for the lawyers to take over. Lest you think that Starbucks or Howard Schultz personally endorse Mr. Zane’s zany vision, we are told (in much smaller print) that “This is the author’s opinion, not necessarily that of Starbucks.”? Are there really lawyers in Seattle who think I’d sue the company just for being a little silly, even hippy-dippy? I know our judicial system if f-ed up but I can’t imagine that, even in “21st Century America,”? that suit would go far.

However, if while trying to read Dan Zanes world view I spill scalding coffee on my crotch, I damn well will try to sue. But, they have that covered. Back around on the front of the cup they warn, “Careful, the beverage you are about to enjoy is extremely hot.”? In other words, you will definitely NOT enjoy it in your lap. In all, you’ve got to hand it to Starbucks. They have carefully parceled out the real estate on their cups to the branding department, the music promotion department, the legal department, and the department of silly ideas. Cool, very cool.