Miles Copeland, III

The official website

Spin Spin Spin, The fallout from the Trump insurrection will offer great educational lessons to the marketer, political pundit, and anyone interested in branding. As I discovered from the days working with big stars like Sting, The Police etc, major companies are super concerned NOT to get themselves into potential consumer loss by being seen as supporting anything that might be considered negative or controversial. There is a lengthy clause in every sponsorship and endorsement contract between stars (music, sports, TV, movies, whatever) and a corporation. There are famous stories of drink companies, shoe companies etc cancelling contracts due to associations that the brand might consider as potential problems.

Banks, PGA and an array of brands cancelling Trump after the Capitol situation is very much that. It is NOT some conspiracy on the left to silence those on the right. In fact many big CEOs, company directors, are Republicans and many probably voted for Trump as he was the Republican candidate. It has always been the case that these corporations donate huge funds to both parties. Many are known to donate more to the Republicans as that party has always been seen as more sympathetic to the rich than the Dems. The Trump mantra of cutting regulation was aimed at pleasing the corporations – so were the tax cuts. So it does not fly to say Corporations are anti Trump – or anti Republican. 

Meanwhile, whatever happened to the “drain the swamp?” Many of Trump hires came from what he called the swamp. One of the great mysteries is how the Trump base (largely of the lower incomes) could go for a guy who was so obviously out for the rich of which he was personally a great example. How he got people to vote against their own interests will be studied for years to come.

Meanwhile the problem is that in so many cases “you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don’t”. Like the current debate over impeachment. If no action is taken does that mean one inadvertently gives license to political figures knowingly spreading falsehoods and paying no price for it? Or does it further divide the country? In fact it does both so what is one to do? There are good arguments on both sides and there are therefore no good answers.

%d bloggers like this: