Big events no guarantee for nations’ image

It did not need much guess work to know that a country holding a major sports event like the summer/winter Olympics or the football Word Cup would leave any impact on the minds of the people for a long time if the internal conditions are not friendly enough and if the country has not developed an image of being a friendly country.

But it seems that it is worth reiterating the simple truth that what works in marketing a product or even a tourist destination may not work for the country’s image as a whole. And it is always reassuring to hear from someone who has been in the job of image analysis for many years.

Simon Anholt, founder of Nations Brands Index which he had set up in 2005, and who is now an independent adviser to more than 60 countries puts it across straight and simple. He said in an interview to the Arab News TV programme of Frankly Speaking, “Looking back over the 20-odd years that I’ve been running surveys on this (subject), the evidence is that running or hosting a big sporting event, such as the football World Cup or the summer Olympics, has no impact, generally speaking, on the image of the country, at least not beyond a few months.”

It did happen that Greece did not gain much after holding the 2004 summer Olympics in Athens, nor did Tokyo after holding the 2020 summer Olympics in July/August 2021.

There was local resentment against the government in Japan for holding the sporting extravaganza when the country was reeling under the Covid-19 pandemic.

And even if the sporting event is successful, it will not be of much help to the host country in the long-term.

What makes the country attractive, it seems, is economic growth and political stability on the one hand, and a sense of friendliness and openness on the other.

The point is that a country should be attractive to the outsiders.

Anholt says that the United States has always remained an attractive country for most people in the world the longest time.

But the US has slipped, especially after its second invasion of Iraq during the second term of George W Bush. Anholt say, “America was always the most admired country on Earth; now, it never is. It seems to have settled down at about seventh to 10th position.”

Another country which had lost its top ranking in the National Brand image is the United Kingdom because of its internal turbulence. According to Anholt, “Aside from invading another country, the only way that you can gradually damage the image of a country is by heaving in a persistently chaotic, turbulent and unfriendly way in the international community, and both the US and UK are proving that from year to year.”

About Israel, which has a negative image because of its persistent and unjustified hostility towards the Palestinians, Anholt argues that Israel has not been affected negatively. But he admits that Israel is not in the top ranks though it is not at the bottom either.

It is also clear that there is no simple marketing trick to build the National Brand image.

And it takes years to build a positive and friendly image and depends on many, and not on anyone factor.

And a campaign to build the National Brand does not give immediate results.

It is only over a period time that a country gains the trust of the international community.

But it is clear that it is the image of a country as a friendly place for immigrants and which offers fair opportunity in terms of jobs as well as doing business that works in favour of the country.