A thought about national security, social media and branding

After reading the New York Times op-ed "Israel's Settlers Are Here To Stay, something occurred to me. (This requires developing further.) Due to the ubiquity and availability of social media, it is no longer possible (if it ever was) to develop a nation-brand the traditional way.

National security demands that not everything be transparent; but the expectation of the audience is that brands will always be authentic. A possible solution could be a bolder stance about what the national vision is (rather than trying to please every stakeholder), and also a bolder assertion that there are simply some things that cannot be discussed.

In the context of Israeli settlers' insistence on a one-state vs. two-state solution, this sounds controversial. But in the end, is it better to simply say clearly what it is that your goal is, or to be more circumspect? In a social media age, I am leaning toward the former - but the problem is that such definitiveness can be too divisive to sustain.

Something to reflect on further.

About

Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal is an author, independent brand researcher, and adjunct marketing professor with 20 years of varied experience. An avid researcher and prolific, creative writer, Dr. Blumenthal's interests span communication, marketing, qualitative media content analysis, political rhetoric, propaganda, leadership, management, organizational development, and more. An engaged citizen, she has for several years worked to raise awareness around child sex trafficking and the dangers of corruption at @drdannielle on Twitter. You can find her articles at Medium, www.AllThingsBrand.com and www.DannielleBlumenthal.com, and she frequently answers questions on Quora. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own.