The Future is a Place - Paris-Val de Marne by CuldeSac

Over the weekend, I got an e-mail telling me about a new place branding campaign for Paris Val-de-Marne - "The Future is a Place". A Spanish creative agency, CuldeSac, prepared the following video as part of their promotional activities. I was pretty excited to learn about this initiative. Because prior to "The Future is a Place", I didn't know anything about Val de Marne. The video clip, the website and the press release are my only sources of information.

This video clip clearly demonstrates one fact: Place branding campaigns have different missions and the messages/images should change accordingly. This particular campaign wants to attract capital to the region, and all related arguments are quite convincing (i.e. infrastructure, proximity to Paris, transportation, existing businesses etc.). The images (airport, transportation, other facilities) used in the video clip bolster the arguments.

At the very same time, the video clip shows us the difficulty of branding only one aspect of a place. I tried to think like an entrepreneur while watching the video. Although I was convinced in business terms to invest in the region, I wanted to know more about the place. Who lives there? What do people do for a living? Any important landmarks? Moreover, especially during the first part (up to 01:30 min) of the clip, I was highly depressed by the dark images, crowded places, lack of faces, and indoor images. In fact, I started thinking of the movie Noi albinoi (The movie is about a socially misfit teenager in a small fishing town in Iceland).

Everyone knows and talks about importance of audience. Your message should be tailored to fit your audiences' needs. As this video shows, not only the content of your message but also your medium and even technical details you use should attract your audiences' interest and gain their respect. The quality of the images will appeal to business owners. However, I am not sure whether online media platforms (Youtube, Vimeo) are the best ways to reach this specific audience.

In a place branding campaign, we shouldn't forget that there will be many people who have no idea about what we are talking about. Therefore, it is important to refrain from unclear images and symbols. Frankly speaking, I am not sure what is happening between 2:10 and 2:30 in the video. I don't know the people, I just assume that they are important figures in the development agency. They are sitting in post-modern chairs (I don't know how to call those chairs), so they should be innovative and creative. But seriously, who are they? Why are they there?

As far as I can see the website and video are produced by two different agencies. Still, I would like to see a consistent message in terms of content and packaging. The colors of the website are different from the colors I saw in the video. As a person who has never been to the region, I don't know what to expect from Val de Marne. The website also lays out five areas of expertise - five prominent industries. Though I don't think I saw all five in the video. I saw some themes (life, sustainability etc) on the video which were not mentioned in the website.

Lastly, I think the music has made me think even more of Noi albinoi. Especially together with the darker images, I was a little bit depressed.

Long story short, I would say, The Future is a Place is likely to be successful in reaching its target audiences provided that appropriate media platforms are chosen. The clip looks professional, it is short, and dynamic. In other words, it attracts attention and doesn't bore the audience. The line of reasoning is quite clear and persuasive. The professional imagery boosts the credibility of the messages. However, especially after seeing CuldeSac's website, I cannot understand why there were so many cloudy scenes in the video.

This blog post is also posted on http://efesevin.wordpress.com/ and http://placebranding.ning.com/.

Prime and Frame, then Cascade the Activation

As the title suggests, nowadays I am a little bit confused about how one can explain media and public opinion relation (especially in nation branding/place branding campaigns). Firstly, mediated reality is a fact. Lippmann saw the situation back in 1922, so I really cannot claim any credit when I say the real world is not important. What is important is the picture in our heads. When we consider the power of media and the various media platforms, another fact comes up: the picture in our heads is the mediated-reality. But how is the mediated-reality formed? Jamieson practically argues that media by choosing what to report and how to report plays an important role. Although her arguments in the Press Effect are quite persuasive and supported by great examples.

Jamieson doesn't use the terminology but what her points are very similar to priming and framing of agenda-setting theories. Media chooses how to frame an issue and what to report as background information in the issue. Practically by giving background information, media makes some knowledge available once again. But still, who controls these priming and framing processes? Journalists? If so, is it too late for me to become a journalist? Politicians? Public? Anyone?

Especially in political context, Entman's Cascading Activation model seems to be very accurate in explaining - well first of all explaining that the process is practically inexplicable - the behavioral patterns of different social actors and their power struggles. The figure below is taken from one of his published articles about White House's frame following 9/11 - illustrating the cascading flow of influence linking each level of the system: the administration, nonadministration elites, news organizations, the texts they produce, and the public (p.419).



Similar to a real waterfall, all the actors include their own input to the flow. I interpret this input to be composed of their own interests and ideas. Therefore, the information that reaches the public has already been 'polluted' a few times. There seems to be a power struggle over who will influence the priming and framing in this process. And the back-flow underlines the fact that public opinion is likely to show an impact on the media, as well as on administration and non-administrative elites.

I assume if we try to apply this model to place/nation branding, the flow chart will be a little bit different:

Branding campaigns should take competitors and other news resources into consideration. Several nations/regions/places try to reach the same audiences with practically similar messages. There might be other news resources feeding the media, such as other interest groups or negative branding campaigns of your competitors or a more 'news-worthy' event. Also, although relevant stakeholders will be included in the process, it is always possible to leave certain influential figures out. Their actions will be based on personal interest which might or might not be compatible with the main branding campaign.

Another important distinction is the possibility of creating communication bridges directly with the public. However, public is likely to disregard the messages if the sender lacks credibility. Also, if the stakeholders and officials are not 'accountable', they are more likely to disregard the messages.

To sum up, media-public opinion relations is very difficult to entirely comprehend, especially in a political context. Given the vague definitions and lack of strong theoretical frameworks in nation/place branding, it is even more tricky. I was amazed by Entman's Cascading Activation Model and came up with a draft of how this model might look like in branding campaigns. As this is a draft model, I would appreciate your feedback! . I will be constantly updating this blog post based on the feedback I receive and (hopefully) come up with a better model.

This blog post is also posted on http://efesevin.wordpress.com/ and http://placebranding.ning.com/.

Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading Activation: Contesting the White House's Frame After 9/11. Political Communication, 20(4), 415-432. doi:10.1080/10584600390244176
Jamieson, K. (2004). The press effect : politicians, journalists, and the stories that shape the political world. Oxford ;;New York: Oxford University Press.

Emotional Branding

I will continue writing on my course-related materials and their compatibility with nation and place branding concepts. The videos below are taken from a PBS program. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out how to embed PBS videos to my blog (but seriously PBS website! 21st century, people want to post your videos to their blogs! Not all the blogs accept your javascript code), so I decided to go with Youtube versions. PBS video has better quality.

In its shortest form, the main idea is 'emotional branding'. Instead of talking about your product, why don't you talk about what your product means to people? Why don't you look for ways to create a sense of belonging? It is important to take a look at why and how this movement towards a spiritual branding started. I had a similar discussion with a marketing professional friend of mine. We are trying to brand products/people/regions/places/nations, but what is the next step? What will happen when, in my case, all the nations in the world have prominent branding campaigns and images? How can we better 'brand'?

Kevin Roberts is right when he says everything works for branding right now (and when he says beer tastes good unless you live in America). There are not tangible differences between place branding campaigns. Recently we did a study on analyzing the main themes of six different place branding campaigns. Although these destinations were different in terms of geography, culture, and economy; their branding campaigns revolved around similar promises (authentic, safe, unique, hospitable, historic & modern etc). As Anholt's dominant nation branding model shows, there are not many different promises. In other words, if you want to compete with other nations for limited sources (let it be tourism, investment, political influence), you might resort to emotional branding.

Naomi Klein practically summarizes her book, No Logo, when she talks about super/mega brands. Corporations focus more on branding than on product. Similarly, Douglas Atkin supports the idea that branding is about creating a meaning system or an identity for the product. Hence, place/nation branding might be considered as being about creating a sense of belonging, rather than arousing interest among target audiences or promoting some aspects of a place/nation. If you can create a sense of belonging, you are more likely to better 'brand' your place.

I am not trying to create new paradigms with my posts on this blog. What I humbly try to do is to underline some important concepts which are less popular. Emotion branding is again not a novelty. It has been used by a few campaigns. The best examples that came up to my mind were Aruba - 90,000 Friends You Haven't Met Yet and I amsterdam. Both campaigns focus on creating a community around their places. You visit Aruba, because, well because you belong there. You have friends waiting for you. The major parts of the branding campaign are based on local people, and visitors. Amsterdam, on the other hand, builds up its campaign on "pride, confidence, and dedication".

In short, everything is branded. All communication channels, media are clogged by similar branding messages. So why don't you go ahead and try to create a sense of belonging and a community pride for your product/place/person/region/city/nation?

This blog post is also posted on http://efesevin.wordpress.com/ and http://placebranding.ning.com/.

Who are you? Legitimacy in Place Branding

I submitted an article for a student publication last week on public diplomacy and place branding. Shortly speaking, I describe how and why we are using public diplomacy and grassroots movements in a regional branding project. I am not going to discuss the details of the article (-as both the article and the project are under review).Though ever since, I started thinking about legitimacy in place branding. In other words, who gave us the authority to work on the regional branding project? Even further, who gave a committee the authority to brand the place? ABS had a great issue on "Legitimacy in the Modern World" last year. However, branding & legitimacy necessitates further research and an explanation for itself (rather than being discussed under a general legitimacy title).


Therkelsen & Halkier* remind us about a classification in branding: inside-out and outside-in. A good branding campaign chooses the former style, and tries to find the brand identity in a place. You are supposed to discuss the local values, traditions, life, actors etc... Does anyone else see the irony here? As an outside consultant, you are expected to lecture local figures about their own values.. Now, even if you have an official title, even if you are a politician, governor, president, or a king; you are never given the authority to build up an identity for your citizens/subjects. So, how can you even think about creating a place brand?

The place branding project that I am a proud part of, therefore, underlines the importance of grassroots movements and public diplomacy. By engaging with the local stakeholders, by raising awareness, and by talking with them about how they see their own home towns, we aim to create credibility, legitimacy, and eventually a long-lasting brand for the region. In communication, it is a known fact that meaning is 'negotiated' and created among several parties. Before setting sail to reach our target audiences, we negotiate the region's meaning with the residents. We encourage them to be a part of the branding. The entire project is based on creating a community pride within people.

Once the brand identity is negotiated with local people, and a sense of social involvement is created, it is time to reach out to the target audiences. Again, public diplomacy and grassroots movements are very effective ways especially during the initial stages of the project. By creating direct, people-to-people communication bridges, you are automatically involved in the 'negotiation' process, and you can create more effective and persuasive brand messages. Moreover, as you enjoy the opportunity to receive instant feedback, you can use your projects as focus group studies as well.

I still have ethical doubts about legitimacy and place branding. As far as I can see, grassroots movements is the best course of action (although I really don't know how effective they will be in larger populations) because firstly you strengthen the community spirit within an inclusive campaign. Secondly, you don't fabricate a brand image but use an inside-out technique. Even before you start disseminating your message, you guarantee a long-lasting brand. And lastly, by sharing your messages through public diplomacy, you build real relations with your audience and hear their feedback. Shortly, if you want to be legitimate, talk with 'everyone'.

* Therkelsen, A., & Halkier, H. (2008). Contemplating Place Branding Umbrellas. The Case of Coordinated National Tourism and Business Promotion in Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 8(2), 159-175. doi:10.1080/15022250802221229

This blog post is also posted on http://efesevin.wordpress.com/ and http://placebranding.ning.com/.