How Political Organizations Use Branding

How Political Organizations Use Branding

  The self-branding of politicians is creating a new political landscape with the help of internet media. As far as politics, there exists a global platform to say anything at any time. Branding in politics relates to reputation and campaign rallies. The way we think of branding today has been transformed in the wake of the 2016 elections. Here’s what politicians and political organizations are now using branding for:   Branding While Overlooking the Brand To understand branding as being an act, start with putting yourself front and center while excessively repeating a message you have. Hearing someone endlessly repeat how great they are mentally imprints “an idea of greatness” in us by sheer repetition. Repeating a message until it sticks means you are branding. According to political analysts, branding is being used to coerce ideas into public sentiment.   To, With Subtlety, Spread Propaganda Propaganda messages easily spread when the public sees them as harmless-public statements. Branding can make propaganda appear harmless when people trust the brand more than what it says. Public trust is being used to override social virtues that we once saw as normal. Getting the public to accept a candidate’s flaws, for example, is becoming an art of branding more so than their policies.   To Defy Politics and Lawmaking If a brand is promoted as being above the law, there is the potential of people becoming radical toward common laws. A democratic government with fair elections is led by the votes of its people. Thus, building a political career by befriending millions of people can result in a brand based on leadership. The...

Sri Lankan Public Opinion

As the American presidential election finally winds down with what appears to be a grudging concession (of sorts) by soon-to-be former President Donald J. Trump, I’ve been thinking about the fickleness of public opinion. Despite pollsters’ valiant attempts to explain and predict the collective attitude of large numbers of people, they often get it wrong, either by mis-measuring the distribution of opinions, or by interpreting accurate data incorrectly. One of the biggest problems is that public opinion can be extraordinarily fickle, especially during, after, and around national security crises. We like to think that there is some stability to public opinion, but in some cases, that kind of stability simply does not exist. One example that stood out to me recently was Sri Lanka. In early 2015, long-time wartime president Mahinda Rajapaksa lost the election to his rival, former health minister Maithripala Sirisena. Rajapaksa had led government forces to bloody victory over the Tamil Tigers in 2009, some 26 years after the insurgents first launched their war of independence. After his victory, Rajapaksa oversaw a tightening of autocratic rule, cracking down on dissent from within Sri Lanka’s minority populations (Tamils and Muslims), as well as within the dominant Sinhalese Buddhist community. One of Rajapaksa’s biggest Achilles heels in the run-up to the 2015 national elections, however, was his heavy reliance on Chinese-funded debt to launch major Sri Lankan infrastructure projects. In the months leading up to the 2015 election, Rajapaksa’s critics zeroed in allegations of corruption, many linked to the Chinese construction projects. Fast forward four years, however, and Rajapaksa was once again elected president. According to the New York Times, public anger at...

Polling a ‘Foreign Tribe’

As the US presidential elections wind their way towards a painful and tortuous conclusion, I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference between reporting on a survey that offers a snapshot in time, as opposed to using polls, and past history, to predict what the results might be in a few days, weeks, or months. My colleagues and I have done lots of surveys over the last eight years in Colombia, India, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, and the USA. In all this work, we offered estimates of how many people in a given population engaged in this or that behavior, supported this or that policy, or thought positively/negatively about a particular organization or institution. There is always a confidence interval around every one of those estimates influenced in large part by the number of valid responses. This allows you answer questions like, “what percentage of the population living in the Moroccan cities of Casablanca or Rabat supported this or that political party in May 2015?” Or, “what is the statistical association between attending mosque and believing that women’s rights are human rights?” If I wanted to ask how many people were likely to vote for a specific Moroccan political party in the future, however, I’d have to do so much more than extrapolate from the previous work I’d done with my colleagues. I’d want to have more polls over time, so that I could track trends, and I’d want to figure out a way of predicting who would be likely to actually participate in the election, assuming that participation was voluntary. In the US, pollsters did not do as good a...
Who Thinks Rights Are Respected in the US?

Who Thinks Rights Are Respected in the US?

What do ordinary Americans think about the state of human rights and civil rights in their country? How bad, or good, do they think things are, and why does it matter? Our Survey My colleague Howard Lavine and I surveyed US public opinion in fall 2018 with the help of YouGov, a leading survey firm. Through them, we recruited a nationally representative sample of 2,000 adults who had signed up with the survey group to answer online questions. YouGov’s team contacted each respondent twice, interviewing each in two waves of 22 and 24 minutes, on average. The median response rate was 86%. To achieve a nationally representative sample, YouGov weighted the 2,000 strong sample by gender, age, race, and education. We split these 2,000 respondents into two equal parts and asked the first about their perception of respect for “human rights” in the U.S. and asked the second about their perception of respect for “civil rights.” We found no meaningful difference between the two, and thus report on both combined. For this question, the 0.95% confidence interval was +/- 1.4%. As Table 1 indicates, most (61%) of the general population sample – represented by the green bars – told us that human/civil rights were reasonably well respected, as these respondents told You Gov that civil/human rights in the U.S. were either respected “some” (38%) or “a lot” (23%). The remainder – 39% – said that rights were respected either “a little” (27%) or “not at all” (12%). We rescaled perceived level of respect for human rights to 0-1 for statistical purposes, in which 0 = “rights are not at...
How Telecom Mechanisms Have Impacted Polling, Part Two

How Telecom Mechanisms Have Impacted Polling, Part Two

Some populations are inherently difficult to survey. As a result, their voices rarely figure into studies of public attitudes, financial or medical needs, or consumer preferences. The most overlooked populations include people without access to the Internet; immigrants, refugees, and persons internally displaced within their own countries; homeless persons; and people living in low-income, repressive, or war-torn countries.  Some organizations have made significant steps towards addressing this problem, and one such group is RIWI, a publicly-traded company based in Toronto, Canada. In the intermediate future, my company, Azimuth Social Research, hopes to partner with RIWI on a cross-national survey project.  RIWI’s Random Domain Intercept Technology (RDIT) invites web users worldwide to participate in surveys in their own language. RIWI bypasses national or sub-national web restrictions by leveraging its ownership, or temporary control, of hundreds of thousands of unused, expired, or abandoned web domains. As RIWI explains, web users often stumble across one of these unused domains while surfing the Internet. Often, this stumble takes users to a “404” or similar error page, but when users run across one of RIWI’s sites, they are instead invited to take part in a quick, anonymous survey. RIWI’s system auto-detects the user’s geographic location, which allows them to offer the survey in a relevant language and to geolocate (whenever possible) the respondent’s position.  RIWI’s method is useful in part because it circumvents government restrictions, as no other agency has a list of RIWI-controlled domains. The RIWI domain inventory, moreover, is constantly changing. As a result, RIWI’s survey work is particularly useful in countries such as China, where the government keeps tight control over...