The recent Olympics gave both Vancouver and Canada a chance to define themselves for the world. Both suffer from lack of clear definition for many. Canada borders the U.S. and many in the U.S. and around the world cannot quite determine what differentiates Canada from its southern neighbor. Vancouver has a reputation for being beautiful, but most people have never had the chance to see it or experience it.
Canadian Olympic organizers went to great lengths to define their country's attributes during the opening and closing ceremonies. In showing off the attributes of the country in the opening statements, Canada found many in the U.S. confused. The major reason is that the vast majority of Americans have virtually no knowledge of Canada. This has been a real problem for Canada--it has not invested in shaping its own image. When one doesn't shape ones own image, it is shaped by others. In the case of Canada, it became thought of as a small version of the U.S., which it is not. Canada is more like a North American enclave of the European Community than it is like a mini-USA.
What happens when an organization or nation has not invested and then has the chance--given during the Olympics--to define itself? It must shape images that are fuzzy. In the process, it can cause confusion, because others already have an image that they believe is correct. It also must help focus internally, helping those inside the organization or nation to understand the key differentiating attributes, and talk to them as well as to outsiders. It is a tough task. We saw that during the Olympics. The opening ceremonies were aimed as much at Canadians as they were at the outside world. Canadians were defining themselves to one another as they defined themselves to outsiders. For those, like myself, who have lived in Canada for some time and understand the country, it was a beautiful display. To others outside of Canada, it might have seemed uninvolving--sort of like being an outsider as a group of friends regale themselves with past memories. Outsiders saw the vast patchwork of Canada but likely found themselves a bit confused. This was especially true for Americans who see everything as a reflection of themselves. It was likely strange to most Americans to see Canada invite the First Nations and Aboriginal peoples to be equal sponsors. Inside Canada, there was a lot of criticism from Quebec that there was not enough French. I also thought that the opening ceremonies did not focus enough on Quebec--a very unique, French-speaking province within a mostly English-speaking country. It is difficult to find the right balance when one has just so much time and has not engaged in framing a brand for some time.
I have read a number of articles in the U.S. papers that were amazed and even irritated by the demonstrations of Canadian patriotism--wearing red, waving the Maple Leaf, and the loud singing of "Oh, Canada". The most recent was from a write in Texas, of all places, one of the most xenophobic states in the U.S. The writer seemed irritated, perhaps because many Americans cannot fathom that Canadians love their country as much as Americans love theirs and prefer living in Canada. The writer actually compared the Canadian shows of patriotism with rallies during Nazi Germany!! The Canadian displays were no different from a sports team encouraging its fans to where all white (Penn State) or orange (Philadelphia Flyers), etc. "Wear red and show your Canadian pride"--what is wrong with that? Customers respond well to companies in which employees love to work or to communities with lots of citizen pride.
I just saw a commercial on Baltimore television for a tour to British Columbia to see Vancouver and Whistler-Blackcome--the settings of the Olympics. Perhaps that branding helped, at least for the west coast of Canada. I would not be surprised at all to see the Olympics lift the image of the rest of Canada as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment