Community

It was obvious once the major players began to embrace the core marketing value of listening and responding. When GM promptly abandoned the Vuick (the story and my take is here), it signaled the company was no longer simply going to pursue a build-it-and-they-will-buy-it approach. (There’s nothing like staring bankruptcy in the face to get the marketing concept going.) Not only that, but GM’s flexibility suggested a new responsiveness that would mean the right products made it to market and the wrong ones didn’t. And that is exactly what’s been happening. Moreover, you’ll notice that all the major automakers are rolling out hybrids and electrics with more variety and choices much faster than anyone could have anticipated. Bottom line: the industry has gotten leaner, and as long as they continue to deliver what their Target Market wants, this turnaround will have staying power. The Loser Given that religion is always a sensitive topic, I want to preface my comments about Pope Benedict by saying this: my criticism is not personal; it’s about the business of branding and the urgent need for the Pope to do the work of branding better —much better. Pope Benedict’s predecessor understood that, good or bad, the world was dominated by a video-dependent, sound-bite hungry media. As Pope John Paul II once supposedly observed about moments like his historic visit to Poland: “If something isn’t filmed, it didn’t happen.” Like his contemporary world figure, Ronald Reagan, he also understood that he had a specific brand, and that the image of this brand needed to be clear and consistent. In other words, Pope John Paul II challenged the world, but he understood the modern ground rules of branding and message-making. Pope Benedict and those advising him must take a page from the John Paul II playbook, because over the past weeks —notably the week that just ended with Easter Sunday— they have done serious brand harm. The first mistake has been the obvious defensiveness of the Pope and those around him. One leading Vatican figure dismissed some of the charges and accusations of pedophilia as “gossip.” Wow. That is simply mindboggling. Why not embrace this sad episode in the history of the Church and use it to teach that even noble endeavors run by humans will struggle with flaws and failing? Sure, there might be anti-Catholicism involved in some of the coverage, but a story is a story, and this story —which is based on clear institutional mistakes and even criminality that led to the cover-up of abuse— is not gossip. And to call it such only suggests a continuing cover-up. The second mistake was made by Pope Benedict alone. He had a golden opportunity to use his Easter Sunday homily to the world as a platform to address this scandal, still festering after almost a decade of wide-spread coverage. He did not do so. This only reinforces the image of the Vatican as out of touch with people’s concerns. Contrast what the Pope didn’t say with what Diarmuid Martin, the Archbishop of Ireland, actually did say: “There is no shortcut to addressing the past. This has been a difficult year. We see how damaging failure of integrity and authenticity are to the body of Christ. Shameful abuse took place within the Church of Christ. The response was hopelessly inadequate.” Now that’s a statement. But for it to be truly effective, it must come out of Pope Benedict’s mouth. Once it does, the Pope shouldn’t stop there. The only way to combat the profound negativity and horror of this scandal is for the Pope to take an extremely active role in making sure it does not happen again. A strong statement of regret and an appeal for forgiveness must be followed up by the rollout of a comprehensive strategy that will be both preventative and punitive. Most importantly, the Pope must be seen to be listening to the people. What better way than for him to actively meet victims and families in a single, world-wide tour dedicated to this purpose alone? This would instantly broadcast that the Pope and the Church are serious about dealing with the problem and moving forward. It would be hard for even the Church’s most active attackers to criticize it for that. Moreover, it is a fact today that such bold and even grand gestures are necessary to counter-balance the negative images and ugly truths. While apologizing and reaching out to people, the Pope can also underscore that the Church may have done the right thing in many cases. He can remind the media that in the nineties, when this story first began to break, he pioneered a policy of zero-tolerance in such matters. He can also explain the Church’s thinking that meant in some cases offending priests were not defrocked —i.e., if kept as priests on a short leash they could be controlled, but if cut loose they’d be an even greater threat to children. In other words, the Pope can rebuild the image of the Church without appearing defensive. He or others can also begin to expose the anti-Catholic sentiment that might be driving some of the coverage —again, without appearing defensive. The Pope’s brand has been seriously hurt, but the nature of the papal brand is one of fundamental strength; it is hard to imagine a more influential personal brand platform. If Pope Benedict taps into this strength, things will turn around faster than anyone can believe right now. And, remember, things are always easier when you keep marketing and branding in mind. TODAY'S TANTILLO TAKEAWAY - The worst brand response to negative attacks is to become defensive.