Will a poster be influence the choice of the next president of the United States?
You can sense the cult-like passion these days for Brand Obama. The icon, the metaphor, the human equivalent of the iPhone for a lot of young voters.
The icon status is not accidental. Not that is contrived, either. Take this famous Shepard Fairey poster that's showing up on the campaign -as you see here on a story about the energized voters at UT Austin. It was created by Mr. Fairey who was not involved with the Obama campaign.
It tells you something about the role of user-generated content that's matured at a perfect time. Before the mother of all cult brands, the iPhone, was released, Apple fans raced to create designs of what they believed the iconic brand would look like.
Once upon a time presidents and prime ministers were more or less positioned and branded by ad agencies and PR strategists. The famous "Labor isn't working" poster by Saatchi & Saatchi for Margaret Thatcher comes to mind. This year in the US elections, the branding -if you could still call it that- is in the hands of the people.
Sure, the Clinton and Obama campaigns pays big money for ridiculous he-said-she-said ads. But what's remembered, talked about, spread virally (the "I have a crush on Obama" and "Yes we can" videos) have been created and launched by citizen campaigners on their own dime.
Speaking of shiny new objects, people camped out to catch a glimpse of, and vote with their pocketbooks for the iPhone. That same crowd -young people -seems all too eager to stand in line to vote for another "advanced communication device."
Link to original postLink to original post