People, Places, Power

In this season finale Simon and Nick discuss the recently published findings of the 2022 version of the Anholt-Ipsos Nation Brands Index. The most noticeable result is that Russia has fallen from 27th place in 2021 to 58th, a dive unlike any other in the history of the index reflecting the international community's alarm at the invasion of Ukraine. They note that Ukraine has not jumped forward in an analogous way, but merely continues to show a gradual improvement in its standing. Simon and Nick discuss these and other features of the new index including the UK dropping out of the top 5, the continuation of German in the top spot and the US remaining 8th. Other issues include a decline of interest in traveling to other places in general and an improvement in the image of Israel.

In this episode Nick and Simon discuss the shifting image of Africa, taking a lead from the latest version of the Anholt-Ipsos Nation Brands Index. Countries discussed include Egypt and Morocco, South Africa, Kenya, Tanzania and Botswana. Simon argues that external knowledge of culture is the key and proposes a collective effort in that regard like a joint equivalent of the British Council. Nick notes some single country successes like Angola's win at the Venice Art biennale. They agree that progress is slow and conclude with discussion of the increased presence of China on the continent.

This episode looks at the smaller units of international image—regions and cities—and how they fare in comparison to national images. Issues discussed include whether they help or hurt a national image and whether the promotion of smaller places is worthwhile. Simon starts out noting that some places are known for their products, with Champagne being the most obvious, but many are destined to remain unknown. Nick notes that the European Union benefits from being known for its smaller constituent parts while China's image in much more intimidating because its regional variations are unknown, and the focus is on the national level. Simon and Nick agree that diversity enhances a national image and note the value of regional images even when they are explicitly at odds with the overall nation state as with the case of the Basque Country and Catalonia within Spain. Simon argues that the internal contradictions, tensions and reactions that emerge from the interplay of local and national identities are part of what make nations vibrant and attractive. The conversation ends with discussion of issues around measurement and of the tension between rural and urban identities around the world.

This episode considers the reputation of the Gulf and its most prominent actors including not only the nation states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE but city state actors like Dubai. First, Simon makes the case that the Gulf is a case of a region's pre-existing negative image dominating perception of constituent parts. He doubts the efficacy of most responses in the circumstance. The conversation includes the perception of Saudi Arabia intimidating and the unlikelihood that the FIFA World Cup in Qatar will help that country's image. Nick raises the positive case of the Abraham Accords as an example of realities changing behind the image. The pair agree that initiatives from the region are frequently impressive but are undermined by a lack of connectivity. Nick suggests that the problem may be the lack of interest of regional royal families in genuine change. He points to particular cases of human rights abuse and royals placing themselves above the law as flaws. Simon argues that there is a fundamental failure of people in the region to understand the values of others and vice versa. The gulf remains unbridged.

This episode considers the utility of place branding and soft power strategies for countries least developed in these areas. The conversation begins by separating the value of a focused tourism promotion campaign from more general promotion strategies. Simon notes that even a successful tourism campaign can be a liability later, citing the difficulty that Jamaica has had being seen as anything other than a holiday place. Simon and Nick concur that the first step to develop an image must be grounded in research/listening to audiences to discover exactly what the image is. They note the success of some smaller countries in developing specializations that are relevant to international audiences, with the digital work seen in Estonia and Rwanda as good examples. Simon sums up the situation by saying that 'grand strategy is more important than brand strategy' and that the best way to a good image is through a good reality in a relevant field.

This episode considers the image of Great Britain as the country mourns the loss of Queen Elizabeth II and simultaneously adapts to a new Prime Minister—Liz Truss—and a new king: Charles III. The discussion begins with Simon recalling the brand equity derived from having a Royal Family, which he estimates in the billions. Simon and Nick continue discussing the value of the royal family to the management of change, providing a national rhythm like a metronome. The pair give high marks to King Charles for his early remarks with their emphasis on inclusivity and the multi-cultural nature of Britain; they welcome the diversity apparent in the Truss cabinet but bemoan the regrettable impression created by Truss's recent remarks questioning whether France is a friend. Simon argues that the royal funeral and eventual coronation will be a moment for Britain to recharge the batteries of its international image. They agree that because of the human tendency to personify countries as people, King Charles will necessarily be a central element in Britain's image. Nick raises the issue of the new king's past comments on social and political issues and speculates on whether he will be the much-needed rallying voice in the collective struggle against climate change. Simon advances his notion of Monarchy 2.0 by which members of royal families worldwide could be coordinated as a kind of UN upper house to speak on global issues.

This episode probes the connection between personal identity and national image, considering Simon's past contention that national image is an extension of the sense of self. Nick agrees and suggests that the connection helps to explain why people feel so strongly about slights to a nation's standing or evidence that a government has allowed prestige to slip. The conversation moves on to consider the ways in which images of other counties became part of self-identity, including ancestral enemies, countries which are historically connected, and countries whose culture merges with expressions of generational identity. Simon points to the phenomenon of reciprocal liking in national image and how countries like France and Germany each understand that the other admires them. He seldom finds examples of unrequited love. The discussion moves on to consider examples of one nation's symbols becoming fashion statements abroad. Nick and Simon then turn to issues of exclusion and minorities. Nick points out that excluded people sometimes only experience their national identity fully when overseas. They note the integration of identity-based politics into international image: Britain, the US, the Nordics and so forth making their concern of LGBTQ rights a major part of their foreign policy, while Russia makes its hostility to such rights part of its brand. The conversation ends with the question of whether it is wise to identify a country with principles that are not universally held by its citizens.

This episode considers one of the problems of international relations today: the absence of the kind of compelling visions of the future that inspired international cooperation in the past. Nick argues that countries need a vision for stability and are finding that in distorted idea of the past rather than an image of the future which might be open to collaboration. Simon notes that most people aren't aware of visions articulated at the transnational level. The conversation develops to include positive messages from the Nordics and other 'hipster' nations; negative messages in fiction and the stand-out case of China as a country which does look to the future and builds ideas about the future into its image and diplomacy. They consider whether apocalyptic ideas imbedded in so many religions might hinder the articulation of visions of the future and the merits of different venues for presenting visions such as expos or Disneyland's Tomorrowland. They conclude that the need for positive visions of the future is critical and that the space seems all too vacant.

This episode considers the implications of the rise of state-sponsored fake news and disinformation for international images. Simon takes the line that the exaggerations of nation branding are on a continuum with all-out lies of malicious propaganda. He calls for better research on public responses to nations using distortion. Does it demonstrably damage reputations? Nick argues that state sponsorship of objective news can be an important component of Soft Power as the BBC is an asset for the UK. He considers the history of this and the ways in our own time by which states are learning to blunt the kind of disruptive media onslaught of the kind deployed by Russia in 2014. He cites the British response to the Skripal case of 2018 and the effective use of so-called 'pre-bunking' strategies in the run up to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Simon worries that the loss of confidence in news undermines the whole notion of things being knowable and plays into Russian hands which prompts Nick to stress the importance not merely of single state sponsored sources of objective news like the BBC but of building free media broadly to create multiple sources of credible news at a community level. The conversation ends with agreement that education is the answer and the perhaps our age of disinformation is a necessary wakeup call for a better future.