dw.com
Shifting Sands: US Companies and Their Image in Germany
Amid declining US popularity in Germany, American companies are adjusting their strategies, with some emphasizing "Made in Germany" branding while others, like McDonald's, highlight their local sourcing and contributions to the German economy.
- How are US companies responding to the decline in US popularity in Germany?
- Some US companies, facing decreased popularity in Germany, are rebranding to emphasize their local contributions. Coca-Cola launched a "Made in Germany" campaign, highlighting its long-standing presence and German bottling. Conversely, McDonald's stresses its use of German produce and its role as a major employer.
- What specific examples illustrate the varying approaches of US companies to managing their image in Germany?
- Coca-Cola's "Made in Germany" campaign directly counters negative perceptions of US policy by focusing on its local production and employment. In contrast, McDonald's emphasizes its sourcing of 65% of its raw materials from Germany, including 100% for certain products, to highlight its integration into the German market.
- What are the broader implications and potential future trends related to US companies' image management in Germany and other countries?
- The shift in branding reflects a growing consumer awareness of political and ethical considerations in purchasing decisions. This trend, exemplified by Tesla's declining sales in Germany amid criticism of Elon Musk, suggests that companies may need to adopt increasingly nuanced strategies to maintain positive international images and navigate evolving consumer preferences. The success of the "Made in Germany" approach remains to be seen.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a balanced view of the relationship between US companies and Germany, showing both positive historical examples and current challenges to their image. However, the framing of the Coca-Cola campaign as a 'response to the consequences of US politics' might subtly suggest a negative correlation, despite Coca-Cola's own explanation. The headline could be improved by focusing on the broader theme instead of a single company's response.
Language Bias
The language used is mostly neutral, with descriptive words like 'unbeliebtesten Menschen weltweit' (most unpopular people worldwide) for Elon Musk, but avoids overly charged or emotional terms. The use of 'Ersatzwährung' (substitute currency) for American cigarettes in post-war Germany is descriptive, not judgmental. However, phrases like 'schlechtes Karma' (bad karma) could be replaced with more neutral terms.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of the specific political actions causing the decline in US popularity in Germany. It also lacks a detailed examination of the economic impact of potential boycotts. This omission makes it difficult to fully assess the extent of the influence of US politics on consumer behavior. While space constraints are likely a factor, further detail would strengthen the analysis.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses how US companies are adapting their marketing strategies in Germany to emphasize local production and sourcing ("Made in Germany"). This directly relates to SDG 12, which promotes sustainable consumption and production patterns, including responsible sourcing and reducing waste. Coca-Cola's campaign highlighting German bottling and employees exemplifies this. The shift reflects consumer preference for products with a strong local connection and commitment to responsible sourcing.