Marketing the politicians

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

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

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

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

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

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