Wikileaks and Terrorism - The New Frontier and what Wikileaks should have said.

This is what Coldblood (Anonymous) is quoted saying: such attacks "may hurt people trying to get to these sites" but that it was "the only effective way to tell these companies that us, the people, are displeased". <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11935539>


Doesn't that sound familiar? The physical collateral damage caused by terrorists (or nation states for that matter) is also justified by them on similar grounds.


I believe the Anonymous attacks are akin to a first world war, albeit a cyber war. And this is just the start, on a small scale. 


I believe that, in the spirit of openness, what Wikileaks is doing is good. And, in fact, it should have taken a very statesman-like stand on the Anonymous attacks. Instead, this is what they say that they neither condemn nor condone these attacks. What! I think the right answer should have been that they condemn such attacks but will encourage peaceful protests (akin to the civil disobedience movement of India). This would be the right thing to say given my take on the issue.


Sure, the nay-sayers would say peaceful "civil disobedience" will not be effective enough. That may have been true in the pre-internet and pre-scocial networking age. Today though, it could have a significant impact. Nobody knows for sure, but time will tell.


Peaceful ways to resolve issues is always the right way. "Force may still be used as a last resort". That last sentence is nebulous and can start endless hypothetical arguments.


Comments are welcome!

HBR Article on the Provenance Paradox

Just read an article in the Dec 2010 HBR by Rohit Deshpande on the Provenance Paradox that is an example of an article lacking a credible suggestion to overcome the PP or a recognition of what the true problem is (IMHO).


He explains what the PP means but his solution....get companies in emerging markets to start Tweeting and increasing their presence on social networks. That will take care of everything. I can't help being cynical at the naivety of the solution. I recognize the possibilities of social media but his is not the solution.


Well, before we get to a solution, lets try to understand what the problem is. IMHO, it comes down to people's perception of a country. Frankly, an India or a China does not measure up to the west. Whether it is democracy, corruption, people's attitude towards civilities and respect of human rights, or just tasteless hedonism (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/soutikbiswas/2010/12/are_indias_rich_not_philanthropic_enough.html), the emerging markets cannot match up to the west.


This is not to say the west has always been a paragon of virtue (colonialism) or is all that good today (the persecution of Roma's; Madoff). 


Recognize that every country and civilization goes through phases (there was a time when India was a paragon of culture and civilization whereas all of Europe was not (pre-Renaissance). Since we are talking of the present and the future of our lifetimes, I can confidently say that the west is far ahead of the emerging markets.


My point may be lost, so let me try to make it now. The perception you now have of a country affects how you view the brands that come from it. If China had been an USA, and Apple were to be born there, then Apple China would have been a great brand. But the reality is that Apple was born in the USA = silicon vally = freedom of expression and land of immense opportunity = amazing people like Steve Jobs who could thrive in this environment = A great company = A great product. I can't write that equation for the China of today (China = no freedom of speech, agressive, etc.) or the Mexico of today (Mexico= drugs, violent crime, etc) or the India of today (India = rampant corruption, ugly politics, caste system, social discrimination, etc.). Basically there is a coolness factor...that is not there in these countries. I don't deny they have good stuff happening in those countries (take the example of Liu Xiabo) but it takes time to get to the coolness.


The Professor of the HBR article goes to great pains to make the point that Japanese and Korean brands also faced the PP when they tried to enter the western markets. But, they were looked down upon. But eventually, the Sonys, Acuras, Hondas, Samsungs, LGs, etc. became respectable and even "cool" brands. But this proves my point because if you look at these two countries today.... you don't think corruption, inequalities, etc. the way you would for the emerging economies. 


The Professor makes other ridiculous suggestions. One that irks me is where he says "Downplay your country of origin". What a shame. Sure it is a quick fix (for profits). But what does it for a country's pride? A long-term solution is to have a country mature, for the people to wake up to the foolishness of their moral DNA (take the Indian caste and social discrimination for example). If you ask for an example, take the newly born nation of Israel (Start-up nation: the story of Israel's economic miracle by By Dan Senor, Saul Singer). 


The Provenance Paradox is a genuine problem. But it will take more than a few slick tricks to overcome it. It will need a paradigm shift in the way people look at their society and countrymen and, finally, their nation's standing on the world stage, that will automatically reflect well on their nation's brands.


Freestyle.


Conversations welcome.