NYT Interview w/Business for Diplomatic Action President

"Erasing the Image of the Ugly American" - interview w/BDA president Keith Reinhard, conducted by William J. Holstein - the New York Times, 23 Oct 2005 (registration required)

Corporate leaders need to improve the international image of the United States because their companies' futures are increasingly at stake, says Keith Reinhard, president of Business for Diplomatic Action and chairman of the advertising agency DDB Worldwide. Here are excerpts from a conversation:

Q. Which American business sectors are feeling the effects of a poor international image?

A. Inbound travel from other countries is off at least 1.5 percent, in terms of market share, from 2000 levels. One share point is 7.6 million visits and $12 billion in sales, because people who visit from other countries tend to stay longer and spend more. That's the equivalent of 153,000 jobs and lots of tax dollars.

Q. Which chief executives are feeling that impact?

A. No C.E.O. is willing to say the bottom line is hurting. But we have research that shows intention. For example, we know that 37 percent of the British intelligentsia say they will avoid buying U.S. brands because of the "cultural identity" of the United States. We know that in Group of 8 countries, 18 percent of the population claim they are avoiding American brands, with the top brand being Marlboro in terms of avoidance. Barbie is another one. McDonald's is another. There is a cooling toward American culture generally across the globe.

Q. Is the war in Iraq driving the negativity?

A. That's one of four root causes. Another is the arrogance, ignorance and insensitivity of American people. A third reason for anti-American sentiment is the pervasiveness of American pop culture. We're not the only source of "cool" anymore. And the fourth reason is the effects of globalization. In developing countries, they resent the fact that American-led globalization has, in their minds, left them out.

Experts say anti-American sentiment is not new and this particular crescendo has been building for two decades, since the fall of Communism. We decided history was over and that we had won. We cut back cultural exchanges, which were so important during the cold war: music and art, jazz in particular. We cut back on the U.S. Information Agency and Voice of America. Then geopolitical events, and differences with U.S. geopolitical policy, ignited that sentiment. In terms of favorability ratings, we're now at an all-time low. In an 18-month period, between the summer of 2002 and spring of last year, in Britain, our favorability dropped from 75 percent to 58 percent. In France, it dropped from 63 percent to 37 percent, and in Germany from 61 to 38 percent.

Q. What can C.E.O.'s do?

A. One thing is to start to work with young people, the next generation of citizen-diplomats, if you will. As an example, we asked people in 130 countries if they would give Americans 10 pieces of advice for when they are traveling abroad. We turned the content over to some bright young kids at Southern Methodist University, and they produced a passport-sized World Citizens Guide for 200,000 American kids who study abroad every year. PepsiCo gave us money to produce this, and U.P.S. helped us distribute it to several hundred colleges and universities.

A second behavioral change is our visa policy, which is seen around the world as unfriendly, unwelcoming and downright arrogant. Business leaders can say to the government, "This is really hurting us and we need to have a friendlier, more welcoming visa policy." We should encourage people to come. For example, we're working with a group called Young Arab Leaders that has identified 500 Arab and Muslim youth who we think should be brought into the United States and into U.S. companies. Think of it as the Fulbright for the private sector. Let's out-recruit Osama bin Laden.

Q. How can multinationals improve perceptions overseas?

A. By sharing their best practices with us, and we can share them more broadly. What wins friends in the local community? What could the United States government learn from those best practices? In Germany, I asked an executive to tell me about his perception that Americans were arrogant. He said, "O.K., Wal-Mart makes their German employees stand up every morning and sing the Wal-Mart song. We're uncomfortable about that in view of our history."

Q. The Bush administration has brought in the president's former communications adviser, Karen Hughes, as a spokeswoman. Is the administration doing enough?

A. The U.S. government, particularly in the region she's focusing on, is not a credible messenger. We've seen that in study after study. A young man from Palestine told me a few weeks ago that Al Hurra, the $60 million television effort on the part of the State Department, is a joke. He said, "We know where it's coming from so it has no credibility."

Q. Aside from Pepsi, who are your most prominent members and supporters in the corporate world?

A. We commissioned John Zogby to do interviews with leaders of U.S. corporations and thought leaders, and we will release that set of interviews. The companies that agreed to participate are a lineup of blue chips - McDonald's, Starbucks, General Motors, Levi Strauss, Marriott, Anheuser Busch, U.P.S., Microsoft, Philip Morris, American Express, General Mills, United Airlines, Ford Motor, Bank of America, Mars, Hasbro, Colgate, Boeing, HBO, Intel and State Farm Insurance.

For some background on BDA, see Anti-American Sentiment Hurts US Economy, Businessman Says.

Comments

[Gregory Kelly]

Deploying Effective Public Diplomacy (Relations)not just a US problem.

During the period of 1998-2001, I was public relations-marketing manager, New York office for an Asian national tourist office. In this particular government-cultural structure, the tourism department was viewed relatively low or unimportant in terms of public diplomacy for this nation in the U.S. market. With the forward thinking of some great directors posted in the office during that period, we deftly orchestrated a culinary arts pr-mkt campaign (Public Diplomacy) that dominated the U.S. culinary arts-culture-tourism community and media at that time.

Ironically, the renaissance of this type of promotion currently under way by aforementioned tourist board is failing miserably (bet that is not in the reports back to headquarters!) for reasons to be discussed in a later post.

Case Study Germany:

Since much of the critiquing involves comments about U.S. Public Diplomacy in Germany we will present another side to the story.

The outgoing German Chancellor actively fostered Anti-Americanism for political gain. We do not fault him; it is/was his prerogative.

German Public Diplomacy in the U.S. market was/is adversely affected by the policies of the outgoing Chancellor. How could he justify capital expenditures for public diplomacy initiatives in the U.S. while proactively promoting Anti-Americanism?

It is during this period that Germany failed to adapt to the ever-changing paradigm of the U.S. and public opinion for the purpose of public diplomacy and promotional activities.

That is the bad news.

The good news is that Germany has in place a formidable mega infrastructure and under utilized resources presently situated in the U.S. Market that with the right ignition source, will serve to overcome biased, sensationalistic media reporting and other false perceptions.