Politicians and brand selection.

No matter how reasonable we like to think human
beings are, irrationality is what drives us. We dislike someone on sight and
justify our dislike split-seconds after: He’s crabby. He seems to be in his own
world. I hear he’s a drunk. We have no direct proof, and yet we believe what we
say. We hold our “opinions” dear, and to us, they define how we think and which
groups we belong to.

Contrary to what
many of my clients think, people decide on brands the same way they decide about
other people. They see ads for brands. They are entertained, amused, they feel
angry, they feel sad, they feel bittersweet, they feel loved, secure, insecure,
they’re curious. They like it. They don’t like it. And afterwards, in that magic
window of reasonability, WHEN ASKED, when the left side of the brain comes into
play, they will say, oh, I like it because it’s nutritious. I like it because it
has ingredient xyz. No one is comfortable spending millions of pesos on vague,
unreasonable emotions, and would much rather have logical benefits and reasons
laid out like square tiles the consumer is expected to step on one by one, in
sequence. One only need look at the amount of trash piled under signs that say
“Bawal magtapon ng basura dito (It’s forbidden to throw your trash here)” to
realize that people are not only irrational, but wholeheartedly, uneditedly so.

Pleas to elect intelligent
politicians, to vote wisely, to avoid being swayed by the crowd, are as useless
as ads that enumerate benefits and ingredients and linger on product shots.
People are never convinced by reason. They’re already convinced, or not, by what
they feel. The only problem left is to explain to themselves – and to others –

When was the last time you allowed
yourself to be argued out of something you truly believed in?