I am Spartacus, I am Obama

I was going to write something about Henley and the rut that the Brown narrative is stuck in. I might have thrown in something on the new NHS constitution that is going to be announced tomorrow in the House of Commons by Alan Johnson and how that might begin a new page in the Brown story. At least that must be the plan and hope for the Prime Minister. But then I saw this story in the International Herald Tribune.

When the rebels are defeated and caught, the Roman soldiers ask, which one of you is Spartacus. Tony Curtis stands and claims it is he. Then another voice shouts 'I am Spartacus', then another and another until they all claim to be Spartacus. If you have never seen the film you will have no idea what I am talking about but stay with me.

The point of the scene is two-fold. It shows the desire to protect Kirk Douglas, I mean Spartacus, and it says to the Romans that Spartacus is not merely a man but an ideal. That life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are... no wait a minute that's the wrong rebellion. Except it isn't because Spartacus as told by Anthony Mann and then then Stanley Kubrick is as much about America and its history as it is about ancient Rome.

And now supporters of Barack Obama are taking his middle name and making it theirs. Why the middle name? Because it is Hussein. Hussein sounds Muslim and Americans are a little ambivalent about Muslims at the moment. If Obama's opponents can make the Muslim tag stick they might help John McCain win the Presidential election. By saying I am Hussein, we are all Hussein, Obama's supporters defuse that line of attack.

But what if they are also tapping into something else. Obama's 'yes we can' is part of the American myth. His supporters tactic is a de facto 'I am Obama'. That proclamation could become very powerful because it feels as though it is no longer about the man but about what the man stands for. If like Spartacus, Obama represents the American ideal and the hopes of the Founding Fathers his arrival at the White House is surely guaranteed.

Are affairs different to relations?

The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) would like all the members of the CIPR Government Affairs Group (GAG) to join the CIPR.

A martian might look at the above statement and think: eh? Surely, if it is the CIPR GAG then they are members. But no, that is not the case. One can join CIPR GAG, attend meetings, stand for the executive and generally participate without being a member of the CIPR. However, the CIPR GAG is a sectoral group of the CIPR. Confused? Well perhaps one should start at the beginning.

First though, some declaratons of interest. I am a member of both the above, was on the exec of CIPR GAG for two years and work in communications. Now let us continue the story of everyday public relatins folk.

The CIPR represents public relations professionals. CIPR GAG has as its members people who are mostly involved in public or government affairs. What's the difference you ask? Are affairs different to relations you ask? At least, I hope you ask this. If you don't do that this post is pointless.

There are many definitions of public relations. And people who work in PR have various job titles: head of communications, head of external affairs, media relations manager, PR manager... I could go on.

The new look PR Week says it is the magazine for communication experts and reputation managers. Not a bad definition of what PR people do. But does this also cover public affairs?

The people who work in this area vary as well. Some focus heavily on policy. Others are lobbyists. In fact, this is where the public affairs industry was born: in the lobby. But in order to be effective it soon became obvious that one had to be able to use other communucation channels and manage reputations. That means that the public affairs expert has to work alongside the media relations, stakeholder, reputation manager person or be the person who does all that. And let's not forget that those engaged in public relations person may well need to change perception and behaviour of the inhabitants of the Westminster village.

The CIPR believes that it is very important for the PR practitioner to live by its ethical code and to ensure that its members are part of a profession. It achieves that through education, training and continuous professional development.

If the CIPR wants to persuade CIPR GAG to say yes to its proposal there are various things it could do to help that happen and at the same time strengthen the industry.

1) The CIPR diploma should cover public affairs
2) The CIPR should offer more public affairs training
3) The CIPR should be the voice of the public affairs industry

The latter is easy to achieve. With a sectoral group already established in CIPR GAG there is a ready-made spokesperson in the shape of the Chairperson. All the CIPR need to do is make sure s/he is media trained, direct the media to her or him and quote them in news releases.

For some there will always be a divide. The public affairs professional who is a policy wonk will never have much in common with the PR Officer who organises consumer awareness campaigns but in between there is a lot of common ground.

Total Politics

The new Iain Dale venture, Total Politics, is launching. Dale, a prolific blogger, one time bookshop owner, parliamentary candidate, current commentator is now a magazine publisher. The magazine's website went up in the last few days.

The site is very colourful and packed with political information. Sarah Mackinlay, the editor, managed to secure an exclusive interview with Gordon Brown for the first edition.

If you are an elected representative you will get sent a free copy, the rest of us have to read it online or buy it at the newstands. It's well worth a read, online or in print. The online versions has extras like a list of political blogs. Sadly, this one isn't mentioned but you can't have everything.

Miss Great Britain Party

It seems that after the 'success' of her campaign in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election, Miss Great Britain has now established her own party. A candidate from the Miss Great Britain Party will stand against David Davis and two candidates are standing in Henley.

The latter is what caught my eye. Apparently, the party is already split between a blonde and brunette faction. In Henley representatives from both wings are standing. This level of splitting is what one expects from the Left. On the other hand the issue of split ends must be of great concern to Miss Great Britain and all the contestants.

A burning question is what about gingers? I have an interest here due to my own colouring. Are they being classed as blondes or brunettes? Surely, they should have their own cabal?

Try as I might, I have failed to find the party's website. So no link I am afraid.

David Davis: a Frank Capra moment

At the end of a Frank Capra film the hero makes a stand for decency, common sense and integrity. Think of Gary Cooper in Mr Deeds Goes to Town or James Stewart in Mr Smith Goes to Washington and James Stewart again in It's a Wonderful Life.

And not only do they make a stand, they normally win.

Much has been, and will be, written about what David Davis has done today. If you missed it, he stood down from the Shadow Cabinet and is resigning his parliamentary seat in order to fight a by-election over the issue of constitutional liberty in Britain. There is apparently some precedent for this sort of action. Davis has his supporters, for now they are mostly appear to be Conservatives and he has his detractors: mostly Labour but some conservative commentators like Bruce Anderson.

I have never met David Davis. The closest I have ever got was to sit at the next table to him in a restaurant. So if you were expecting some amazing insight into all of this I must disappoint you. I have none.

But I wonder if he rather sees himself as a bit of a Capra hero. If he does, we might call this Mr Davis leaves Westminster. On re-winning his parliamentary seat he would make a speech about liberty, the rule of law and danger of giving all one's sovereignty to the State. If Capra was directing people around Davis would begin to cry. Then they would cheer. As the credits rolled we would be left with the idea that all those stolen liberties would be returned.

But things might not quite work out like that. Resigning only to take your seat has a vague Marx Brothers feel about it. Or worse than that, we could be watching one of those dud modern Hollywood attempts to remake a classic screwball comedy only to discover that it is a disappointing damp squib: little media attention, low turnout and a career that suddenly flatlines.

Perhaps none of this matters. Davis has something he felt he had to do. Is it madness, a disregard for parliamentary convention, due to a row with Cameron? We don't know and we may never know. Politicians don't normally surprise us. They are a fairly predictable bunch.

Whatever else people might say, they can't claim that about David Davis.

Education, education, education

I recently came across a blog called To Miss with Love. It is written by a teacher who works in an inner-city London school.

The discussion about education never seems to end. And much of it is by people whose last direct experience of education was when they were at school.

I found her Special Measures post particularly interesting. She shines a very interesting light into schools in this country. As well as telling her readers what it is like to teach. The added bonus is that she is very amusing. Recommended!

I have now added her to my 'political comment' section. And on the link sections, a quick word of explanation. I have recently changed the layout. Instead of political blogs, I have created a political comment section. This includes anyone writing about politics or political subjects. Most are in the UK but one is from the US.

I have added a news and analysis section for the USA because of the Presidential election.

The links section are just that. The organisations that are being to link to are ones that work with children directly, giving them the opportunity to control their lives and make choices.

One last thing. The blogs and sites under political comments are a mixture. Some annoy me, some I disagree with at times and others I nod my head as I read them. They are there because they are providing insight into politics or defining the political debate. I endorse them in as much as I think they are worth reading. I don't agree with every word they write. Then again, if I did I suppose I wouldn't bother to blog.

Obama

According to the New York Times Obama almost has the nomination as superdelegates come forward to support him.

Brands, narratives, brand narratives, Steve Hilton, politics, Honda and the importance of keeping titles short

There is a lot written about brands and narratives these days. To those who are outside the world of public relations and marketing it must seem a bit strange or just nonsense. Politicians talk about narratives too. Then there are brand narratives to think about.

Two things have happened recently that neatly illustrate why all this matters. Honda ran a live television ad and Steve Hilton declared he was going to work from home. Home in California that is. And in case you didn't know it, work is for David Cameron, leader of the Conservative party who happens to be based in Westminster.

Farmers and ranchers brand their animal with a mark to prove ownership. A mark, symbol or set of letters can denote a brand. There is a bit of a debate about what a brand really is. My own preference is to say that a brand is the representation of an organisation. This means a brand will consist of a logo, values and what the organisation is offering e.g. a product or service.

A narrative is a story. In her recent post, Charlotte Gore defined this as: "A retrospective historical account of the whys of a political movement."

An interesting definition but not quite how I see it. To illustrate how I understand it, let's take Honda and that live television advert.

Claire Beale, in the Independent, does a great job of explaining what is so clever about the ad. Skydiving out of planes has been done before. What is so bold, so interesting about the Honda ad is that it was live. Something could have gone wrong. It simply might not have worked or something much more serious like loss of life could have taken place. Okay, that is unlikely, but the fact that Honda and Channel 4 were willing to do this speaks volumes about how they see their brands and their narratives: a confidence that the brand can withstand damage.

A couple of years ago I was at a CIPR conference. Fraser Hardie, MD of Blue Rubicon, spoke at length about Honda. The company was started by Soichiro Honda. His first product was innovative, bold, efficient and delivered. These values have stayed with the company ever since. I don't know the history of Honda. Perhaps the brand narrative fell away at some point but they are fully aware of them now. These values are part of the Honda story: the Honda ads encapsulates that story.

Honda knows its brand narrative. It is what anchors it to itself and keeps it a success. A brand narrative is rather like a myth. We love myths because they tell us something about ourselves: where we have come from and who we are.

I can't think of a better example than John Ford's The Searchers. The film is rich in the mythology of the American West at time when domestically the US was struggling with who it was and where it was going. Narratives matter, brands matter. Understand them correctly and you will be able to develop products or services people want. And dare I say, policies.

Enter stage centre-right, Steve Hilton. Or perhaps I should say exit.

Hilton is famed for decontaminating the Tory brand. Like Peter Mandelson, he understood what his party needed. Both strategists changed the logo, the language and the sense of what their parties were about. Hilton did it quicker than Mandelson because Hilton had Cameron. Mandelson had to wait until Blair came along.

And neither totally re-invented the brand. They looked hard and found another way to communicate it.

Ms Gore applies her view to narratives by talking about what a Liberal Democrat government might do. This for her is how to define a narrative: base it on what has happened. Which is true in one sense but the narrative begins at the beginning of an idea, company, political party or movement.

Interestingly, at the end of her post she declares: "I could never vote Conservative... I could never vote Labour... I'm instinctively a Liberal. I seek to wield the fist of the state at the bullshit merchants and the cheats. I want the country to be innovative, creative and free. I want it to be a country where people are free from the tyranny of crime and poverty. In all, I want a liberal country. And to me, that's what that actually means. If liberalism really works we should have the best educated people, the most content and peaceful people and the result of that should be a country that is more successful than other countries. That's the measure, and at the moment this country fails - Conservatism is mediocrity. Labourism is infantalisation."

Regardless of whether you agree with that or not, it is a brand narrative. It is based on a core assumption like Honda's axiom: 'difficult is worth doing', it has values and it has vision.

Honda or Hilton could have chosen a different narrative. It might have worked but probably wouldn't. A brand must have roots in the thing it represents. The narrative tells the story. So get your brand narrative right and you are far more likely to be successful. You might not. There are no guarantees in this world.

My own brand narrative is flawed. I talk too much, write too many long sentences and my titles are far too long. But at least I understand these deficiencies even if I fail to do anything about them.

For Ms Gore and all those other Liberal Democrats interested in this stuff, the question they should be asking is, do the Lib Dems have their own Steve Hilton?