Branding a Bailout/Stimulus

It just struck me how important branding is and how well the Obama administration has used it in the brief weeks since Jan 20th.  The $700 million “bailout” negotiated by the Bush controlled white house was given a negative connotation right from the beginning simply because the media and politicians very quickly called it a bailout.  Of course, no one with self pride wants a bailout, and no one wants to give a bailout to to someone (in this instance, banks) who don’t deserve it.

On the otherhand, everyone does want to do something to “stimulate” the economy and hence a $825/$890/$(whatever it is right now) billion stimulus package seems to have much more general support than I remember the bailout package ever having.  Sure, there is much more to these two packages, including their official names, but I just thought this was interesting.

2 thoughts on “Branding a Bailout/Stimulus

  1. Bush called his bill a stimulus, too. I think the more interesting point is that Obama is continuing Bush policies in the most important areas like the economy and defense. He also talked a lot about protectionism during his campaign, but met with Canada today to talk about free and open trade. (I’m not complaining, but I am worried that eventually his supporters will catch on and Obama’s going to have to overcompensate for his centrism to keep them from getting pissed off.)

    • What Bush called his bill, officially or unofficially, is not the point. What matters more is how the media branded it…

Comments are closed.