Made in the USA: how national populism is shaping marketing campaigns

In March, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order to combat false or inaccurate advertising of “Made in USA” claims, especially in digital marketplaces. It was part of sweeping trade policies that, according to the White House, “deliver on his promise to put America first”. “American businesses building, growing, and manufacturing all, or virtually all, aspects of their products onshore are entitled to the undiluted branding benefits that come with supporting the American economy,” Trump’s executive order read, “and American citizens attempting to buy American products should have certainty as to what American-origin claims mean.” In a world of growing national populism, country-of-origin labelling has become a political issue, as foreign brands can often seem – or easily be portrayed as – less aligned with national interests. This can be particularly problematic for certain products like Scotch whisky or French champagne, whose identity, prestige and branding are tied to their national origins, but our research shows that populism affects consumer and marketing behaviour across the board. Election results affect marketing To understand how a national-populist election victory shapes marketing, we conducted a study centered on the automobile industry in the US. Along with Daniel Brannon at the University of Northern Colorado, we analysed the impact that national-populist gains have on advertising and price promotion effectiveness for foreign and domestic brands. First, we compared all new vehicle registrations in Texas before and after the 2016 US presidential election. We then re-created this test in France during the 2024 EU elections, when Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party saw unprecedented gains, this time focusing on the household textile industry. What we observed in both cases was that advertising became more effective for domestic brands, whose market share grew by a larger amount than foreign brands as their advertising spending increased. In fact, we observed that foreign brands’ advertising actually became less effective – by 0.16% – after the national-populist party wins than it was prior to the election. Similarly, domestic brands also benefited from more effective price promotions than foreign brands. Their market share grew by 0.30%, a larger amount than foreign brands for a similar level of increase price promotion spending. Put simply, domestic brands’ advertising and price promotions were at a noticeable advantage when national-populist parties were in the ascendant. Advertisers are already adapting These results are of particular interest to marketers, who may consider concealing their brand’s country of origin as a result. But lack of transparency does not generally play well with consumers, and can backfire badly. With some brands, just pinning down their country of origin can be tricky for consumers. Take upmarket ice cream company Häagen-Dazs. Despite its Danish-sounding name the company was founded by Polish-Jewish immigrants in New York City, and is now manufactured around the world, including in Canada, France and Japan. Instead of hiding or highlighting this complexity, some global brands are instead spotlighting their contributions to national and local economies. These include emphasis on local manufacturing, job creation and supply-chain investments. But even this needs to be done carefully, as national populism does not receive the same support in all regions of a country, so strategies must be adapted to target certain regions. Coca-Cola has made this move in Germany. A recent marketing campaign highlights the brand’s contributions to the German market, with ads featuring employees with German names – such as Heike or Jana – who produce and bottle Coca-Cola. The campaign’s slogan, “Made in Germany”, makes it very clear that they want consumers to know the whole process takes place in the European country. This particular campaign is not just a product of Germany’s own populist turn. In a climate marked by strained US-German relations and boycotts of American goods across the world, it may currently be a wise marketing decision for certain brands to distance themselves from the US. Read more: Why Heineken’s zero-alcohol London Underground campaign fell flat Informing consumers Marketing a brand as “domestic” or “foreign” is not always easy. The label is rooted in consumers’ perceptions – which was the criteria used in our study, as opposed to manufacturing location – but these are often at odds with the complex reality of global supply chains. For instance, around the time of the 2016 USA election, some “foreign” car brands actually manufactured more of their US vehicles domestically than “domestic” US brands. The impact of populism is also not uniform across all brands. If a brand is associated with positive attributes like quality or reliability, it matters less to consumers whether it is labelled as a foreign, domestic or neutral. Among US consumers, for instance, Japanese manufacturers tend to have higher reliability perceptions, while Italian brands are associated with stronger styling. Companies need to factor all this in as they devise their marketing strategies. Until recently, country-of-origin labelling was mostly informational, akin to a food product’s list of ingredients or an electronic product’s technical specifications. However, in a politically polarised world, it could be the thing that makes or breaks a brand’s sales and reputation. A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!