Three Reasons Why Negative Works for Politics But Not For Actual Advertising

(MoneyWatch)  I spoke to John Quelch, the author of Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes for Better Democracy and a marketing professor at Harvard Business School recently about the marketing lessons we could learn from this presidential election. While speaking, he laid out three reasons why going negative, something this campaign cycle has certainly seen plenty of, works for politicians, but (usually) doesn't work for brands. They are:

1. Regulation
   
   "The FTC doesn't regulate political speech," points out Quelch. In other words, while a pol's TV spot can say pretty much whatever they think is effective against an opponent, the only repercussions will come in the court of public opinion. Not so when it comes to selling a product. The extensive regulations the FTC has in place for business advertisers regulate exactly what is deceptive in advertising, and gives the federal body the power to issue cease and desist orders, as well as fine violators up to $11,000 a day for future violations.
2. Brands Have to Coexist Within a Market
   
   Unlike politicians, who are offering a binary choice -- me or the other guy -- brands must negotiate a delicate balance. "Pepsi and Coke have to co-exist on the shelf for the long term," says Quelch, "because if they pull each other down, no one's going to drink carbonated soft drinks anymore." For most brands, this means burnishing their own image rather than tearing down another. There are, of course, obvious exceptions -- I'm a Mac, I'm a PC being an obvious one -- but for the most part, a successful company will focus on why a consumer should buy its product, not why they shouldn't buy another. A politician doesn't care if three people vote or if three hundred million people vote, as long as he or she gains a plurality. Coke and Pepsi very much care how many people are drinking carbonated soft drinks.
3. Politics Has a Drop Dead Date
   Related to the second reason, politics by its very nature has a moment when marketing and brand image is become largely irrelevant -- the day after Election Day. Brands have no such luxury. "Pepsi and Coke are fighting day to day," says Quelch, "but one doesn't disappear from the shelves after a certain date." While politicians every reason to go negative in the closing days of the campaign, brands never have the luxury knowing there's a set end date. "It's this do or die date that promotes negative, dirty tricks to which we are accustomed," notes Quelch.

While both politics and marketing are ultimately about branding -- the politician is a product just as surely as Coke and Pepsi are -- the rules governing both how we chose and what makes rational sense are vastly different.