GM's Inauthentic Brand Story
GM's Inauthentic Brand Story

As General Motors and its US competitors slide closer to oblivion, GM, the leader of the domestic auto-making pack, still fails to understand that survival in the post-advertising age demands that it tell an authentic story with all its words, images and actions.

Begging the taxpayers for survival money, GM is displaying the same inauthentic approach to communicating that has driven its business into the dirt for the past quarter century. If you want to cast yourself as the down-on-your-luck-but-deserving recipient of a government bailout, you don’t fly to D.C. in a $50-million-plus private jet. (Virtually every member of the US Congress and the news media now has pointed this out.) And you don’t get off the plane with no story about what you plan to do with the taxpayers’ money. (Similarly, Ford CEO Alan Mulally, when asked if he would work for $1 a year in exchange for government loans said, "I think I'm okay where I am." See taxpayer reaction here. It's brutal.)

But failing to have a believable story has been a GM hallmark for years.

It is GM’s inability to narrate a coherent story that has made it the poster child for the ineffectiveness of traditional advertising*. In the past two decades or so, GM has consistently outspent its rivals on TV and print advertising, always ranking in the top three or four big spenders among all advertisers in the US. It spent $3 billion last year; $3.3 billion the year before. During this time, of course, GM has also consistently bled market share. In the ‘90s, roughly 1 in 3 cars and trucks sold here was a GM vehicle. Today, it’s more like 1 in 5, despite dumping roughly $35 billion into ads over the decade.

Now GM has shifted its bungling from an inability to design, craft and sell cars to an inability to design, craft and sell its own rescue. But this was only to be expected because GM is making the same mistake today that it has made everyday for many years—it can’t tell its own story. It can’t articulate a vision, a mission or a differentiating and meaningful role it intends to play in the lives of its audience.

Whatever else it does, GM should fire its ad agencies and PR staff tomorrow. (First on the list to be canned would be GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson who responded, in part, to the private jet misstep with the following self-serving, self-important crap: "It's not something where you'd want to stand in line on a commercial flight and risk having your flight canceled… Pretty high stakes when you're testifying in front of the House and Senate like that.") Instead, they should hire someone who can tell an authentic story about why anyone should bail out GM and buy its products.

I would suggest, for starters, that Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm is telling a far more engaging and important story for GM than GM ever has told for itself. On CNN this past Sunday, Granholm was telling Wolf Blitzer that the US auto industry’s real story is that they "have to lead this nation to energy independence."

If that’s true—and I believe it actually is true—then that’s the story GM needs to live and tell in all its words, images and actions.

*A good example of what we are talking about is this new ad:

Stealing liberally (but in a second-rate way) from the 1985 Ridley Scott movie "Legend," the ad alludes to the fact that people probably believe any high-quality, high-gas-mileage car from GM is a "myth." But it tells absolutely no credible story that would lead anyone to believe GM this time.

At a moment when GM needs to be compelling and authentic, it is distracting and Hollywood, instead.

Comments

Don't like your avatar? Get a Gravatar!

December 7. 2008 10:28 AM

RHarris

Matt:

There is a complete disconnect between your advertising narrative and the truth of your product. This is really a story about the 'tin clank of the counterfeit'. The more you exaggerate your hype the more we consumers run to the alternatives. We consumers are only stupid for a while.

Like a rock? My auto mechanic purchased a beautiful looking GMC truck earlier this year. I asked him how he liked it. He responded, "Let's just say it's a good thing I'm a mechanic."

It is discouraging to watch GM loose market share to the foreign car makers. I would love nothing more then to know my home-grown car makers were superior to the foreigners. But sadly, this is not the case. Market share loss year over year proves it. And now you come begging to taxpayers for gazillions of dollars?! Pathetic.

Here's some advice. Cut your ad budget to zero and pour all that money into building a phenomenal product. PERIOD. Let the word on the street carry the day. At which time I might forgive GM and even consider buying a GM product (and won't care for a second about the exec's zipping around in their fancy jet).

RHarris

November 24. 2008 6:25 PM

Matt Scarlett

Hi – this is Matt Scarlett, and I'm the Corporate Advertising Manager at
GM. I read your post and although I respect your opinion, I am a little
surprised that someone could come to the conclusion that our brand is
somehow “inauthentic” or that we've entered the "post advertising age."

GM has spent more in advertising than any other manufacturer over the past
decade because we have had more launches, more models, more brands and more
sales and market share. In fact approximately half our advertising weight
is dealer funded and directly related to our volume. Our company is unique
in that we have both a storied, legendary past and an exciting future. I
mean, on one hand, you have GM’s past: we’re the company that created the
Camaro, Corvette and Eldorado, all iconic vehicles that remain among the
most highly-celebrated cars in history. On the other hand, we’re the
company that today is developing both advanced technologies like the Chevy
Volt, hydrogen fuel cells, and hybrid mass transit, as well as new
marketplace winners. Our Saturn Aura, Chevy Malibu and Cadillac CTS have
all been cited as “Cars of the Year” by industry observers.

We’re proud of our past and focused on the future – indeed, we spent most
of 2008 talking about the “next hundred years of General Motors” at
GMNext.com. We’ve been active in engaging both our advocates and detractors
through social and traditional media, and we’ve done so in good times and
bad. I'll be the first to tell you we need to do a better job of marketing
and communicating our message, and that's my job. Whether it is "Like a
Rock," "Heartbeat of America," "Breakthrough," or "Think Differently," we
should constantly explore new and more effective ways to tell our story.
And, while we certainly put more and more emphasis on social media and new
ways of communicating, I would say we are not yet in a 'post advertising
age.' We're in a 'new communications age' where marketing, PR, social media
and relationship management have a greater say on consumer attitudes and
purchase preferences than carpet-bombing the three TV networks with
60-second TV ads.

If being an integral slice of Americana as well as an important player in
developing the automobiles of the future renders our brand inauthentic,
then we'll work even harder to change that perception. Thanks for being
honest about how you feel.

Matt Scarlett

To comment on this article please login now. Not registered? Register now.

IN THE POST-ADVERTISING AGE,
THE BRANDS THAT TELL THE BEST STORIES WIN.
Story Worldwide
Post Editor
Jeremy Greenfield
Jeremy Greenfield
Opinions, queries, thoughts, hunches, help...
Contributors
AddThis Feed Button
Post-Advertising