This land is your brand, this land is my brand… They’re over us again. The inevitable Olympics, that is. The Olympics are big politics and a people’s movement, dreams and nightmares, dope and hope. Everything is huuuuuge when it comes to the Olympics, and some of it quite controversial. It begins long before the day a city gets chosen to be an Olympic city, seven years before the event itself, and it lasts long after the Olympic flame has died out, or travelled on. And it will undoubtedly mark the city, in both good and bad ways.

Oh, I know a fire…

The Olympics are one of those world stages where nations really think of themselves in term of being a brand. What does it mean for the brand Russia and for Putin himself when the country is banned from participating from such a world event, the way they apparently (!) was before this year’s winter extravaganza? The deputy of the Duma said this: Russia needs to boycott the Olympics in 2018. Letting a country participate, but without its flag, means the country is humiliated. Sports is no doubt political, and in Russia more than anywhere else. Here the official line is to celebrate athletes who have taken illegal drugs as Russian heroes, no matter what the world at large would have to say about the matter.

Pyeoungchang versus Pyongyang

The fact that the South Korean region arranging the Olympic Games has a name that for a western, untrained eye – and ear – is barely separable from the North Korean capital, might create some confusion. Probably it can be compared our ability to differ between New York and Newark, but on the international arena it could be a recipe for confusion. In spite of the tongue-twisting name, South Korea should have a perfect opportunity to present their brand. If we regard all the nations of the world as brands, it’s obvious some of them have room for improvement, to put it mildly. A country like North Korea has threatened countries in east and ...eh… south with their atomic arsenal, and for a long while it seemed they wouldn’t be allowed to be part of the Olympics. But now, suddenly, they’re invited in from the cold again. They will be there with their athletes, probably exhibiting their propaganda, messages it will be impossible to believe in if you are outside the country’s borders. Kim Jong-un probably sees this as a new opportunity to be noticed, so let’s hope this happens in a relatively sporty way. “The Olympics are one of those world stages where nations really think of themselves in term of being a brand.”

Snowden versus Trump

The leaders, and the people, of a country, very often take their home ground very serious. Just look at how China reacts when it comes to Nobel Prize nominations. Seen through official chinese eyes no one should be allowed to suggest a peaceful resistance in Hong Kong for the Nobel Prize. It’s also quite possible that someone has talked to someone when it comes to the fact that the Peace Prize might go to Edward Snowden, who has been named a traitor in the States. Someone has even nominated Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize of 2018, and that would come as an even greater surprise than him being elected President. If he is picked out to be one of the nominees it would be solid proof that the system is corrupt. So, let’s cross our fingers. There must still be something we can believe in.

"An Olympics is one of those arenas where nations think of themselves as a brand."

Kazakhstan versus Borat

Believe it or not, genuine diplomats from the world’s ninth largest country, Kazakhstan, ended up in a dispute with the fictitious character Borat, from the film of the same name. They wanted Britain to ban Sacha Baron Cohen’s parody. They clearly showed that they understood little of the concept of artistic freedom and presented themselves like a parody of an old Soviet state. Thanks to a clear-thinking press attaché at the embassy in Washington, Kazakhstan managed to actually turn the global attention towards Borat into something positive, according to Robert Saunders, an expert in “nation branding”.

Country versus brand

There is a lot that can affect a country's brand. All too often, people do not have as many associations with all the states of the world, and in this way Switzerland is associated with mountains, bells, banks and wealth, while New Zealand is cataloged under Maori, nature and the Lord of the Rings recording, to put it bluntly. And Kazakhstan is judged on the jokes of an English comedian.

Nations as a brand

FutureBrand presents what they call the Country Brand Index, which deals with the different countries in roughly the same way as they measure how different companies and products are regarded as brands. Their hypothesis is that nations can be seen as the “sum of the country’s identity and reputation”. And, just like with other brands, our perception of the countries’ strengths and weaknesses will affect our attitude towards them. Would we like to visit the country? Would we like to move there or live there for a while? Would we like to invest there? Would we buy goods from them?

Prior to the 2014-15 market survey, FutureBrand wanted to test the hypothesis that not all nations qualify as "brands" but those that do have measurable competitive advantages. FutureBrand established that only 22 of the 75 countries put under the magnifying glass deserved the description "nation brand". "Nation Brands" have an above average widespread perception among those asked when it came to parameters such as status, experience, quality of life, values, business, culture and history.

And these are the results of the 2014-2015 Country Brand rankings:

01. Japan
02. Switzerland
03. Germany
04. Sweden
05. Canada
06. Norway
07. USA
08. Australia
09. Denmark
10. Austria
11. New Zealand
12. Great Britain
13. Finland
14. Singapore
15. Iceland
16. The Netherlands
17. France
18. Italy
19. The United Arab Emirates
20. South Korea

This is the first time Japan has had the yellow leader’s jersey in this survey. Traditionally, the Nordic countries do very well, including Norway. But we are beaten by the Swedes here. It will be interesting to see if the Olympics will influence South Korea’s place on the list next time this survey is carried out. Here, as you see, they at the bottom, on the 20th place.

City and brand, hand in hand

When Lillehammer was awarded the winter Olympics in 1994, not many people foresaw the major changes this athletic event would mean to everything from investment and infrastructure to national self-image and international recognition. A lot of the things were done right in connection with the Lillehammer Winter Olympics. Both the town and the nation became incredibly much more visible in the public domain and we still reap benefits from these Olympics today. Even if we do not necessarily have very much nice to say about the old head of the IOC, Samaranch, we have taken on board his comments: “The best games ever”.

Let the games begin!