Bic’s tricks with pens - leave children in the developing world twiddling their thumbs.

Bic Pen Spinning Academy, the latest branding exercise by the best selling stationary company, asks teenagers and college students in the Western world: “Do you like your fingers? Do you hate it when they get bored, and their spirits are low? Give them a treat! Pen spinning is a real sport – give those fingers a Bic pen and teach them to spin it and perform tricks that will take your breath away. Your fingers will turn pro at the Bic pen spinning academy.”

Enter the academy and marvel at the Quicktime movie demonstrations of the ‘backaround’, ‘charge’, ‘the sonic’ and other exotically named feats of pen conjuring.

Clearly, an attempt to associate the Bic name with the values of cool, one wonders what depth of research the best selling stationary company’s branding/advertising/marketing agencies must have under taken to conceive this latest attempt at impressing young minds with the Bic name. Just how far were they willing to go? Or did they, as it seems, conjure up this one, drinking smart drinks while loafing on a trendy sofa in a loft studio, and, well, twiddling their thumbs?

Perhaps, quite rightly, they assumed in the digital age, teenagers and college students have little use for plastic ball point pens, and so needed to appreciate the ‘added value’ of having one. But in attempting to appeal to the slacker generation by solving their greatest gripe - boredom - Bic have missed a huge opportunity to imbue their brand with a more long lasting value.

Consider how a child in the developing world might respond to the opening lines of the Bic Pen Spinning Academy: Do you like your fingers? Do you hate it when they get bored, and their spirits are low?

If they are like many village children in the Indian state of Kerala, they might be saying, I know what you mean. After all these are the children who run along the riverbanks of the province’s wetlands, chasing pleasure boats filled with western tourists, (enjoying the $1/R40 £1/R75 exchange rate) and screaming ‘One Pen’ , ‘You Give One Pen’.

Unbeknown to some travellers (possibly of the same slacker generation) who share openly in their blogs just how annoying these children can be, or, how appalling it was that so few said thank you when they were given one, the reason these children are willing to run and swim literally miles, until a Westerner takes pity on them, and throws a 50 cent pen towards the bank, is not because the pen is foreign as this blogger suggests, but because they cannot afford even the Bic pens on sale in India, which they need to be given entry to their school.

Simply put without a pen, which they must provide, they cannot get an education.

Of course we might ask what exactly does Bic have to do with the plight of illiterate children in India. Surely, that is a problem for the state government of Kerala? Of course it is. And undoubtedly the state government of Kerala would argue that at an impressive 90% they have the highest level of literacy in the country. But that still leaves some 3,000,000 Keralans who can’t read or write, including one assumes many of the children running the riverbanks and disturbing the tranquil sojourns of western travelers with their cry of ‘One Pen.’

That’s thousands of children whom Bic might reach out to by joining the drive for global literacy. After all, that is what a pen is for, isn’t it? Writing, and by consequence the things that writing enables us to do, like get an education, or write a personal letter to congress or government, or sign a petition.

What if the price of a Bic ballpoint was raised by just 1 cent, to go towards providing ‘One Pen’, to enable children like those in Kerala, to get an education, and in so doing, reminding the college student or teenager, who might otherwise be spinning their pen, of the value of their education, and indeed, just how easy it is to help others.

Of course like many global brands Bic have been quick to respond to the need to embrace a more global vision. Of note is their commitment to sustainable development. In addition they have not ignored the opportunity to share their wealth too. More recently, in association with their Sri Lankan distributor, Darley Butler, they committed to sponsor the full education (eight years) of 25 children, whose lives where hit by the Tsunami.

However, these scholarships are a mere drop in the ocean of the Euro 170 million profits which Bic made in 2006, and what’s more, such acts of social responsibility will always be hidden at the back of their corporate website.

If current brand thinking is to be taken seriously, that brands should provide thought leadership and vision, about what their product or service can enable us to do, then Bic have some thinking to do.

Currently, Bic’s pen spinning academy says the experience their brand offers teenagers and college students is how to be a slacker. How to waste their time.

By considering the real life changing value of what their pens can do for children in the developing world - give them an education - Bic have the opportunity to put their conscience, currently hidden at the back of their website, at the heart of their communication with the customer. One pen at a time.

In becoming a force in the drive for global literacy, as opposed to how to alleviate the boredom of the modern world, Bic might just elevate their image to something more than a company who make throwaway products.

As it says in the Bic company report, the BIC tradition, ‘continues’ to both “Honor the Past and Invent the Future.” From humble Pen maker, to empowerer of global literacy? Now that’s something that will take our breath away.

Thought for the day: Consider a world in which big brands appeal to the highest potential of the human heart to share, rather than the lowest common denominator of the desire economy.

Brand Beautiful is the blog of Nick Kettles, www.nickkettles.co.uk

Re-Branding the Union Jack - set the Saltire free.

Given that we have recently cast our Brand Beautiful eye on the US, it seems only fair we consider the state of the UK brand as well. So what then is this rare act of common sense, intelligence or humanity on the part of UK brand stakeholders. Er….

Actually, the first signs of a break-out of common sense appeared ‘north of the border’ when Scots in droves, started to embrace freedom as a value worthy of the UK brand. The freedom to amicably end the union – which a recent opinion poll reveals is exactly what a majority (52%) of Scots want. Indeed, the same poll revealed that even more (59%) UK stakeholders south of the border (the English) also wanted to free the Scots from the yoke of Westminster. How kind.

But from whence does this sudden break out of common sense and tempered nationalism – amongst both Scots and English - have its origin you may ask?

The insane combination of the undemocratic British electroral system, and the Labour policy of devolution. The latter handed Scotland control over its domestic affairs (on which the English could not now vote) but the former means the Labour government relies on the support of MPs elected in Scotland to maintain its Westminister majority, resulting in a situation where the Scots still retain influence over domestic matters in England; sometimes foisting measures on England, that a cross party majority of English MPs would reject.

For example, Scottish MPs voted for tuition fees at English universities, even though the Scottish parliament had decided students at Scottish universities would pay none (unless the students came from England).

Do you follow?

If not, all you need to know is that Blair is in a panic; as ever confused by freedom as a value, his Big Tent politic is falling in on itself. As Simon Jenkin reported this week in the Guardian: “The prime minister, chancellor of the exchequer, home secretary, defence secretary, trade secretary and Scots ministerial expatriates galore travelled in a posse north to a Labour conference in Oban, like a bunch of Spanish hidalgos racing back from the fleshpots of Madrid to quell a revolt in their home province. Their objective was to suppress one man, Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National party."

Now if we look through Labour’s rhetorical veil of bluster about being stronger together and weaker apart (whose oil is anyway – but that’s another story) we see the real reason they fear this man.

His case for Scottish Independence is being presented in a very coherent and open way. Qualities that make Westminster spin doctors very uncomfortable indeed.

At it’s heart is simply an appeal that the English respect the Scots right to go it alone, and find out for themselves, whether, like many other former partner nations of a similar population, like Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and even Norway (with the highest standard of living in the world), they too can create a nation to be proud of, even if that means living with a budget deficit, which is not unlike most western countries do, of which spring to mind countries like er…England.

Of, course Alex Salmond, is a politician, too, which means he is also a shrewd operator, as revealed by the SNP’s commitment to retain HRH Elizabeth II as monarch, although in a ‘devolved’ way like other Commonwealth countries. Why on earth would a tub thumping nationalist want to keep a Royal Family, who, in spite of the late Queen Mums Scottish roots, is English through and through, in a German and Greek type way? Surely, that would be the tie they wanted most to sunder?

In fact its one of his trump cards (poor pun alert) to be played in case of protracted squabbles over North Sea oil. Knowing that tourism will form the engine of the new Scottish economy, he knows the importance of attracting inward investment.

Just like the £1billion, US business man Donald Trump is committed to investing in a new state of the art golf course resort in sunny Aberdeenshire, as part of his desire to forge links with the homeland of his mother. What’s the connection between Donald and the Royal Family you may ask?

As part of his capacity as roving ambassador to attract foreign investment, Prince Andrew, the Royal Family’s official representative at Pro-AM Golf tournaments, visited Trump Towers, not to apply for the next series of ‘The Apprentice’ which Donald hosts in the US, but to discuss the attractions of doing business in the soon to be defunct Britain.

Mr Trump described the duke as a "great guy" who made a "terrific impression" in a presentation on the country's advantages. "He gave a presentation here to make sure I spend £1bn in your country and that's what I'm going to be doing," said Mr Trump. One assumes that while the roving golfer continues to bring in that kind of investment - presuming its not all for golf courses - then Mr Salmond will be happy to put matters of royal history like the stone of Scone, to one side for a while.

Opponents of the Aberdeenshire development include the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Scotland, which says wind-swept, shifting dunes on the site are an important nesting habitat for skylarks, lapwings and shelducks.

Mr Trump will have to be sure to wear a tam-o-shanter then to protect his famous buffoon hair, which he revealed on the Larry King show is not a toupee but a comb over. Fine that’s sorted then.

Thought for the day: Imagine a world where politicians trust.

Brand Beautiful is the blog of Nick Kettles, www.nickkettles.co.uk

Brand America sheds its skin - mid-terms point towards new core values.

Were the recent US mid-term elections, which saw the Democrats seize control of the senate and congress, the first step towards the ‘transmogrification’ of Brand America?

Que? Brand America?

Yes. This blog, is, afterall, dedicated to rare acts of humanity, intelligence and common sense, by the world’s largest brands, and who else are those amongst the US electorate who voted for change, but stakeholders in the brand we know as the American nation state?

Two years ago, according to the BBC, President Bush narrowly won re-election, because the Republicans managed to get a deciding margin of mostly conservative, church-going people who didn't usually vote to show up and show their support for Mr Bush.

But, having given Mr. Bush the benefit of the doubt two years ago, they could only see warts and hubris and disaster this time. Not to mention the stain of the Ted Haggard and Mark Foley scandals on the Republican administration.

So, I’d like to propose the mid-terms indicate, that with the right direction, beauty can become a value associated with Brand America once again.

Beauty? But aren’t all politicians the same once they get into power? Doesn’t power tend to corrupt 'beauty' and absolute power corrupt 'beauty' absolutely? That, it seems, is a matter of degree.

As Martin Kettle wrote in the Guardian earlier this year the problem US voters faced in the mid-terms was again how to usurp a king called George . His article, which related the excellent work of Boston Globe journalist Charlie Savage, reported that over the last five years, President George Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws that have been enacted by the United States Congress since he took office, arguing that the president's oath of office endows him with an independent authority to decide what a law means.

Well, thank goodness the tide is turning on that abuse of power.

And while we have no party affiliation here, it behoves us to consider which values a new CEO will bring to Brand America. Whether we like them or not, they will become the public face of Brand America.

So, assuming that George is holding a busted flush, and, that as the midterms indicate, the Democrats will be returned to power, what can we glean from the acceptance speeches of Democrat Senators with an eye on the White House in 2008?

Not a lot to be honest, they all remain very cautious card players at this time.

Except for something very poignant Hilary Clinton said. When she rebuked Dick Cheney’s ‘full speed ahead' fiat with the words ‘not so fast’, she revealed the first glimmer of a value so many in the world want to see in Brand America. Slowness. The perfect antidote to ‘the fastest gun in the West’ foreign policy of the Bush administration.

So, just how can a country famed for liberty and opportunity benefit from Slowing down?

In Praise of Slowness: Challenging the Cult of Speed by Carl Honore the author explores, a quiet revolution known as "the slow movement," which is attempting to integrate the advances of the information age into a lifestyle that is marked by an "inner slowness" that gives more depth to relationships with others and with oneself.

Honore credits Carol Petrini, an Italian culinary writer and founder of the slow food movement in Italy, with spearheading the trend to using fresh local foods, grown with sustainable farming techniques that are consumed in a leisurely manner with good company.

Mmm. A US foreign policy inspired by the Slow Food movement – some thought.

What would it taste like? I don’t know for sure, but it would probably taste far better than a Big Mac. One hopes, it will have been cooked slowly, seasoned with level headedness and magnamity.

But as the Washington Post notes the Hilary Clinton is still seen by many as part of a failed Democratic Party establishment -- led by her husband -- that enabled the George W. Bush presidency and the Republican majorities, and all the havoc they have wreaked at home and abroad.

So to succeed in 2008, she’s going to need a new elevator pitch or two that’s for sure.

One hopes she will take her inspiration from America the Beautiful, 'crown thy good with universal brotherhood, from sea to shining sea', national anthem in waiting, and not the more belligerent war image inspired Star-Spangled Banner.

Thought for the day. The classic Marlboro Man image of Americana, has been replaced by an image of an altruistic geek, in a state-of-the-art, alternative fuel car rolling into Silicon Valley (carpooling of course.)

Brand Beautiful is the blog of freelance writer Nick Kettles, www.nickkettles.co.uk

The Big Giveaway: when philanthropy meets long term sustainability.

The recent surge in philanthropy by the world’s richest, implies they have considered the sheer insanity of bequeathing their vast fortunes on their children, who might find it difficult to spend even a tenth in their own lifetimes.

It also implies they have considered the moral responsibility of having wealth beyond their means to spend it, while so many in developing countries have so little.

Bill Gates knows this, it seems Warren Buffet does too. “I'm not an enthusiast for dynastic wealth’ he says. ‘When there are 6 billion people who have much poorer lives.”

Quite. Let the giving continue.

Never has philanthropy been so fashionable. The Huffington Post reports ‘that along with Gates, and Buffett, the founders of online powerhouses like Google and eBay, stars like Bono, Oprah, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, and Brad Pitt are adding a consumer-friendly, front-page brand of philanthropy with one clear message - "be like us." Or to be more precise: "give...and be like us.” ‘

But, amongst them, Sir Richard Branson’s recent decision to dedicate the profits from all of Virgin’s travel companies, some $3billion, over the next 10 years, towards solving Global Warming, suggests he has taken his reasoning to enter the philanthropic super league, one step further: by considering the ultimate end game for planet earth. "We must rapidly wean ourselves off our dependence on coal and fossil fuels," he said. You put it in a nutshell Sir Richard.

He may not be familiar with the Cree Indian Prophecy, that ‘Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money.’ But it’s possible that Al Gore is, and as we know it was Al Gore, with whom Sir Richard Branson met, before making his momentous announcement.

According to Branson, Gore said to him, "Look, you're in a position where you might be able to make an influence — if you could make a bold gesture then maybe other people will make a bold gesture as well',"

So, what is it that makes Sir Richard so bold?

Well, Virgin is a privately held company, and has been since he considered the possibility of being swallowed up by some behemoth, threatened by his innovation, in the early nineties. But what also makes him so bold, is his vision. Simply put, why not be the first airline to pioneer green air flights? Why not be first train company to run it’s stock on biofuel?

This is not to imply his motive is anything less than heartfelt. What I’m implying is he has allowed himself to consider a superior logic that sees the circle of virtue that is created when brands adhere to the core principles of long-term sustainability. Such vision inspired philanthropy results in a win-win situation for everyone. Including to many living in those regions of the world, to whom the aid supplied by other philanthropists, is directed.

As the BBC reported earlier this year, the truth is, that climate change does affect people's ability to grow crops, rear livestock and find water to drink. Even malaria has become more and more life threatening in many places as it spreads to warming regions.

Will Shell be so bold? Will BP? Or Total? Will they remained tied to a vision of energy security, rather than the more noble vision of energy independence? It’s not such a rum thought to think they might. All they need to do is pose the same question that George Shultz does in his book The Oil End Game , "How many more times must we be hit on the head by a two-by-four before we do something decisive about this acute problem?."

Thought for the day: Imagine a world where oil as a commodity is worthless.

Brand Beautiful is the blog of freelance writer Nick Kettles, www.nickkettles.co.uk