Skip to main content

On The Handwritten Notes That Won An Election


Can it be only a few short years ago that my bosses talked about "Twittering?"

That it took 5 hours to approve a single Tweet, which had to go through a "workflow?"

Shaking my head.

The "business case" required.

Agony and hand-wringing.

Confusion about metrics - is it "reach" or is it "impressions" or "total exposures" or what?

I know, let's make ourselves look good - by only sharing good news! In a peppy voice?

Or, let's talk to ourselves a bit...with "grip-and-grin" handshake photos taken at our latest event.

Wow.

Call me controversial but I think it's safe to say that this is the first presidential election won on the basis of...Tweets.

What made those Tweets compelling?

It wasn't the fact that the candidate quoted himself a lot.

It wasn't the whirring blades of the helicopter overhead.

It wasn't that he landed in some remote part of the world, and gave us moment-by-moment updates about the fascinating people and cuisine.

No.

The reason we loved those Tweets, was because they were so very real.

These were the thoughts of a man who spoke directly to us.

Who literally took a pen to paper.

Who confided in us his vision, his dreams, his soaring aspirations - and yes, also raw emotions that many of us keep to ourselves.

Bitterness.

Anger.

Fury.

Fear.

I think it's safe to say that nobody, not even the experts, saw such a successful Twitter account coming.

Nobody dared to breathe the words that were the truth - the truth - which is that Donald J. Trump knocked it out of the park, because he used a free social media tool.

In the way it was perhaps not intended.

For a serious man, a significant leader, to simply be himself.

______________
All opinions my own. Public domain photo by geralt via Pixabay.



Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

________________
All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …