When sometime ago one of the world’s biggest advertising agencies declared that brands are the new religion," I never took the organization seriously. But now that it is obvious that our priests and political leaders are failing us, I have started to understand the wisdom in the declaration. Why would a ‘man of God’ set any member of his congregation ablaze? If most of our governors have been declared corrupt by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and some of them have even broken their presidential political communication campaigns, what is the fate of the ordinary Nigerian?

Should the only satisfaction to our insatiable spiritual and civic yearnings therefore come from the manufacturers of shirts, soft drinks, etc? Talking about soft drinks, have you ever imagined why Coca-Cola has religiously maintained its number one spot on The Best Global Brands Scoreboard with a 2005 brand value of US $67,525 million? I understand that before branding or even management evolved as disciplines, Coca-Cola was already spending over US $ 11,000 on just one mass advertising campaign as far back as 1892!

I love all I read about the Times Square- I look forward to seeing it someday. But I only got to know after my trip to the UK that I missed the square’s equivalent though I was on Piccadilly Street! I am told by a good friend here that the Piccadilly Circus is the equivalent of the Times Square. The latter is described as a signature of America’s marketing and financial prowess, a world-famous tourist attraction and one of the country’s most coveted marketing communications venues." These were the exact words of Abbey Klassen in Advertising Age’s post to me sometime last year.

I also know that its billboards which tower above the broadway and 42nd street neighbourhood are among America’s most effective- and most expensive- advertisements. Yet Coca-Cola has, since 1935, been in the square and today, it spends between $200,000 and $350,000 monthly for South Side of Two Times Square, 47th between 7th and broadway.

Unfortunately I could not track this year’s advertising week, but I am aware that the campaign for the Advertising Walk of Fame Icon of the Year was quite competitive. Colonel Sanders and other advertising spokes characters such as Chester Cheeter, the Kool-Aid man and Mr. Peanut showed seriousness by visiting the Times Square on June 21 as organizers of the Advertising Week in New York busied themselves with pre-nationwide voting on America’s favourite icons and slogans.

Among the slogans that competed for slogan of the year were Gillette’s The best a man can get," Just do it," for Nike; and Don’t mess with Texas," for the Texas Department of Transportation (Willow Duttge 2006).

However, I find a comment by Burtch Drake, president of the American Association of Advertising Agencies on the competition quite interesting: You win by campaigning."

Can this be said about our politicians? According to Chris A. Doghudje, former CEO of Lintas, Lagos, Nigerians are completely indifferent to political communication with regard to voting patterns and general political behaviour.

For our unofficial professor" of advertising to have predicted as far back as 1991 that communication, no matter how powerful, would not influence Nigerian voting behaviour in the near future does it then mean political advertising may not be popular with us for a long time? As we prepare for the 2007 elections, I can confirm that our political campaigns are increasingly looking and sounding more like commercial campaigns.

I am really impressed with the recent advertising industry billing data volunteered by the Association of Advertising Agencies of Nigeria; it put the 2005 figure at N34 billion with a promise that 2006 would be better. I only hope that political advertising will make the roll call of sectors that would have contributed significantly. In the US, for example, over $5 billion was spent on political advertising in 2004, while that figure is expected to surpass $9 billion in 2008 presidential year (Dave Morgan 2006).

But political ads so far are not many as most aspirants prefer to use crown posters instead. This could be due to many reasons and I will be surprised if cost is not one. Apart from a couple of candidates, politicians are avoiding TV despite the fact that it is not difficult to buy and media independents know it quite well. We also want to see more political ads aimed at boosting parties as a whole. This is without prejudice to the suitability of candidates on such party platforms. I again recognize the fact that Nigerians usually vote on party basis not caring much about who the down ticket candidates are.

Compared to the United States, the tone of our political ads is not boldly harsh and that seems to be quite encouraging. It is also remarkable that we do not have a situation where, there are no rules guiding the content and form of political advertising. Our political advertisers are accountable to a couple of regulatory bodies for the accuracy of their claims. The amount of negativity in political campaigns actually shrinks the market" rather than increase the sponsor’s relative share (S. Iyengar and M. Prior 1999). So for candidates especially those with the ‘broom’ wishing to engage advertising, this should be done with restraint.

After carrying out an informal research, I found that the public is not too keen to identify with media-based political campaigns. Most of my respondents actually felt that campaign commercials were not useful in helping them choose a candidate during the last elections. At this stage I am beginning to wonder if focus should not also shift to the Internet. The Internet is known for its efficient method of finding and communicating with volunteers and even for serving as an extraordinary tool for cost-effective fund-raising. Direct mail is another tool worth using as it obviously aids database marketing. Email actually serves the same purpose. Our politicians can actively buy interactive online banners where they meet with prospective voters. However, the Internet is limited by the fact that it under-represents people who are more likely to vote, i.e. older. But that notwithstanding, it could be combined in an integrated communication manner.

With violence, e.g. political assassinations, and rigging characterizing our politics I believe our advertising should seriously educate Nigerians more on the need to keep the country one and vote people of high integrity into office. What Silverbird and Vanguard newspapers did recently is quite commendable- sensitizing the people on the ideal president for the country ahead of the 2007 elections. However, if actually ordinary Nigerians voted for some of the characters in that exercise then it means this nation is thoroughly confused!

Do you know why some people would rather vote for a branded product instead? True brands transcend product format. They are ethically robust and environmentally pure. These brands engage in meaningful Corporate Social Investment, not mere lip service as our politicians do. And guess what, this is a potent driver of consumer loyalty! KFC’s Colonel Sanders did not just hand-out red cards calling on people to vote for him- he had track records to allude to, e.g. quality of KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken) products, the role played by Colonel Sanders in the development of the fast-food industry and the fact that he was the only ‘human’ in the group of icons who attended the Times Square campaign; Colonel Sanders founded KFC, while the role was played by Col. John Baxley of Anniston, Alabama.

If brands could go this length, then our political campaigners are hereby challenged. The amazing thing about this experience is that advertising fans vote at authentic US Federal Election Commission voting booths set up at the event! Alternatively, people vote online at a dedicated advertising week site. The irony of the American society is that people find little to like in political advertising which they dismiss as unfair, nasty and misleading.

But I cannot stop referring to Hal Riney’s Morning Again in America" 1984 image campaign for Ronald Reagan. It was positive, poetic and is still memorable. It was beautifully executed, attractive and gained a lot of attention because it was fundamentally true- based on fact. Americans have remained the masters of political and advocacy advertising and this form of advertising is now challenging the news as the major source of election discourse.

In our own case, perhaps the news will for a long time remain the major source of election activities. In the face of declarations of states of emergency; political elimination; hostage takings; ‘men of God’ disparaging one another, preaching about wealth creation and; contesting political posts, etc. I am scared that Nigerians might fill the void by making brands their icons. Consider Coca-Cola: its trademark was formally filed in the US in 1892 and has consistently been flaunted with the same script to date.

At a time it associated its brand with a bright red colour, the hour-glass shaped bottle (1915) and the ribbon logo (1970). All these together have contributed in differentiating Coke from rivals such as Pepsi-Cola which I admire for its consistent competition.

So who would you vote for?