| Martha Stewart has indisputably
earned brand magic. Her image as a purveyor of lifestyle advice
has been skillfully crafted to the point of Disney-like fantasy.
From her cookbooks to linens to towels, we purchase these products
because we perceive them as quality. As consumers, we have essentially
been buying into an image.
What we have here is a brilliant brand created with PR - - which
is now in the throws of being crushed by negative PR. In the wake
of Martha’s recent conviction, she is head on with her biggest
PR challenge to date.
When Martha was charged in June 2002 for conspiracy, obstruction
of justice, and securities fraud over her sale of her ImClone stock,
her image was shattered to pieces. The domestic queen immediately
relinquished the roles of CEO and chairwoman and assumed the role
as chief creative officer and a director of the board.
Martha’s billion-dollar dynasty, Martha Stewart Living Omnipedia,
Inc., which boasts multiple properties including television, publishing,
branded merchandise, and retail business, has taken a significant
beating. The Company’s stock has plummeted by 60%, a far cry
from the brisk early days. Their flagship magazine, Martha Stewart,
reduced circulation drastically due to skittish advertisers and
lagging consumer interest. The broadcast segment suffered as well
- - Viacom pulled Martha Stewart Living from their CBS and UPN stations.
On a more basic level, Martha has done a splendid job in maintaining
an ongoing conversation with customers and building brand affiliations.
This has resulted in converting consumers into customers, and customers
into brand loyalists and long-term purchasers.
Sadly, what took years to build is potentially beyond repair. Is
the damage to Martha’s credibility reversible? Can the conglomerate
survive without her?
Here’s a case where it’s difficult, if not impossible,
to separate the person from the brand. Martha’s story illustrates
the pitfalls of basing a company on the image and vision of one
person. While it is true that Martha has a loyal customer base,
the brand that took years to build is damaged forever.
One of the biggest challenges that lay ahead for the conglomerate
is surviving beyond the founder and namesake. It’s complicated
to extract Martha from the business because Martha is the business.
The business will have to go beyond the creativity and reputation
of a sole individual in order to thrive.
The lesson learned here is that corporate image is fragile and
business must establish new rules for corporate image maintenance.
Although books have been written on this subject, none will be as
compelling as Martha’s story - - it is a case history in the
making which will undoubtedly alter how companies develop brands
around individuals. Indeed, many companies assert that it is best
to anchor a brand into something that’s non-human and sustainable.
There is no doubt that Martha, the brand, must now assume a life
apart from Martha, the individual.
The “perfect” Martha, who was conjured up through branding
tactics, could absolutely do no wrong in the kitchen or the garden.
Whether it be braising fish or creating the ultimate floral arrangement,
we obediently heeded her every word. As humans, we are imperfect
and prone to malfunctioning. Martha will no doubt have to reinvent
herself - - similar to a new product launch, we can expect to see
the “new and improved” Martha. Perhaps said best by
Anna Quindlen, “The thing that is really hard, and really
amazing, is giving up on being perfect and beginning the work of
becoming yourself.”
Unfortunately, Martha further damaged her image after the scandal
hit and during her trial. The once highly visible Martha went into
hiding. Although, she had an opportunity to present her case in
the best possible light, the lack of visibility seemed an attempt
to cover up. A definite PR no-no!
Martha instead harnessed the power of the Internet as her communication
tool of choice. Her website, marthatalks.com has logged more than
32 million hits since it went live last June. Martha has received
150,000 e-mails – more than 40,000 of which have flooded in
since the verdict was announced in early March.
While some cheered the verdict, saleable items that protest Martha’s
conviction have become commonplace. Martha fans can demonstrate
their support for Martha by logging on to savemartha.com. Items
can be purchased ranging from a “Save Martha Teddy Bear”
($19) to a “You Must Acquit Retro BBQ Apron” ($22) to
“Save Martha Lipstick” ($15). For those that don’t
want to dig into their pockets, the home page allows supporters
to post a mother’s day message for Martha for “all she
has done to celebrate motherhood.”
Martha did not lie about the thread count of sheets. She falsified
information about investment matters. And while her rise to fame
was based on “personality”, not character, the verdict
is not clear whether Martha will be the one we continue to count
on for advice on caramelizing apples.
|
