Alberta’s “image” problem? It’s not Alberta!
Can things get any worse for Alberta’s new branding initiative? After taking a lot of flak about the slogan “Alberta: freedom to create. Spirit to achieve” and even more flak about the price tag, $25 million, it’s been discovered one of the photos used in the campaign isn’t even from Alberta.
Today Edmonton Journal columnist Paula Simons told the story about the latest chapter in Alberta’s ill-fated rebranding. It’s an interesting story. You wonder how, or if, it could get any worse for the Alberta government.
How did it get worse? One of the photos they used in their campaign was of Northumberland beach in England near Bamburgh Castle; quite a famous beach.
Sure, it’s not the end of the world, and really, it’s funny, depending on whether you’re in government or not, but it sure doesn’t help Alberta’s PR efforts. It seems sort of… small time.
They say that any publicity is good publicity, but Alberta’s had plenty of bad publicity these days. I’m wondering when Edmonton PR company Calder Bateman’s $25 million campaign is going to start generating positive results for the province.
I’ll cut Calder Bateman some slack though. They’ve really got an uphill battle to try and rebrand Alberta. The oilsands aren’t exactly the Hanging Gardens of Babylon and every ecologically-conscious person on Earth seems to have the oilsands as a target. It’s hard to fight that. You can see the oilsands from space though; so that’s something.
Image of an English beach
One thing is obvious: doing PR for Alberta is not easy! You have to be aware of every little detail, like race. Yes, now that’s become an issue. I mean, I don’t really think it’s an issue, but somebody raised it, so now it is.
Paula Simons brought up the observation that there are few, if any, “ethnic” faces in the promotional video.
Nobody’s denying that Alberta has a rich cultural heritage and is made up of a diverse ethnic population. Dropping in some video from any one of Alberta’s many cultural festivals would have proven that. Just wait for the “racist” labels to start flowing now.
Now Alberta’s PR efforts are damned if they do and damned if they don’t with Paula Simons suggesting:
“We shouldn’t include token “minority” faces in our promotional video because that’s the “politically correct” thing to do. We should include them because they represent the rich reality of contemporary Alberta. We should be celebrating and promoting our authentic cultural diversity because it’s what makes us unique.”
So now if any promotional videos include Alberta’s minorities, they’ll be pandering. If they don’t, they’re racist. It’s a rare day when I feel sympathy for politicians, but today I do. I can respect their desire to rebrand Alberta and show the world what a wonderful place Alberta is. Unfortunately, the whole exercise has just blown up in their face.
Rather than spending $25 million on rebranding the province, they should be focusing some serious effort on making the whole oilsands project more environmentally friendly. The whole operation has a huge carbon footprint (it uses massive amounts of natural gas and other fuels), its huge toxic tailings ponds are leaking and killing ducks and it uses very large amounts of fresh water (which ends up in the toxic tailings ponds). From what I’ve heard, there’s also a great deal of air pollution that results from the operation too.
I can see why the $25 million rebranding initiative was done. It just seemed like the easier way to go. They must be thinking otherwise now.
Alain, I agree with your point that the money could have been better spent on cleaning up the environmental problems we’re creating in this province.
On the other hand, the logo re-design seems to be well received by the design community (even to the point of getting noticed in the popular Brand New blog). I myself, like that piece of the branding initiative.
I don’t disagree that the new logo looks pretty good. I just don’t think it’s $25 million good. I think that the province does have to work to correct its image problems, but is a PR campaign the best way to do it?
Considering I work in the communications/PR field now, you’d think I’d be all for it. If I were the PR guy for the province I’d be advising as I have: clean up the mess and let everyone know you’re doing that.
I think it’s critical to take serious action to correct the environmental problems. That’s what everyone has a problem with. Before the oilsands, what was Alberta known for? I think Jasper National Park and Banff National Park would be at the top of the list. Ranching, oil and the Calgary Stampede would be a couple others. Wayne Gretzky and the Edmonton Oilers.
What’s messed it all up? The oilsands. Why? Because the method of disposing of the waste products is, to say the least, inadequate. It also pumps out colossal amounts of greenhouse gases in the process. All other mines have to deal with their waste appropriately, how are the oilsands different?
I don’t object to the project. I’d just like to see it done in a cleaner manner.
Alain, David Sands of the PAB here. Yes, we dropped the ball on the use of the Northumberland image outside of the brand book. An apology on our blog explains how. http://www.alberta.ca/blog/home.cfm
As to your reference to spending on branding versus the environment, I assure you that expenditures for environmental protection and enhancement dwarf the three-year branding budget.
There’s a pretty good summary of what we’re doing environment-wise in oil sands at this link, it’s just 12 minutes if you can spare the time: http://oilsands.alberta.ca/ (Click on the “Conversation” image)
As to the comments about reflecting diversity in the brand book, well, I honestly do not know the ethnicity of any of the people shown. But the brand website is not static; we’re out there asking people to send us their photos, videos and words. That is where the real Alberta will be reflected, we hope.
David, I appreciate your response and for the links. It’s good to get some perspective on what’s happening inside government.
I know there are plans to change how things are operating in Fort McMurray. What I am wondering is if the planned changes are sufficient to alter the perceptions of the oilsands outside of Alberta.
I think that carbon capture and storage is great, in theory. Would the $2 billion be better spent on developing alternatives to natural gas? I think this is where the idea of a nuclear power plant has wheels. How that would be implemented is another story. A CANDU reactor presents a whole range of other environmental issues, including release of heavy water laced with tritium. http://alainthejournalist.blogspot.com/2006/12/stress-test-fridge-cleaning-trans-fats.html
I think that tritium release has to be one of the primary concerns regarding a power plant in the Peace River area.
Cleanly generated electricity (not coal) would be a better alternative than natural gas and would likely negate the need for a carbon capture and storage program in Fort McMurray.
As I stated in my post, I don’t think that race is an issue on the Alberta brand site. I think that’s a real reach! I also know it’s virtually impossible to defend against those types of allegations.
I think that most Albertans are on board with the oilsands project, but we’d like to see it cleaned up and operating in as green a manner as possible.
Thanks again for your comment.