1.
THE
EUROPEAN
UNION
Which
brand
image?
Pierre
Hagen
–
Cristina
Nicoleta
Burcă
1

2.
Contents
Preface
....................................................................................................................................................
3
I.
One
image
for
a
brand?
One
image
for
a
country?
.........................................................................
4
II.
A
positive
and
strong
brand
image:
an
identity
for
Europe
............................................................
6
III.
Assessment
of
the
EU’s
brand
image
..............................................................................................
7
IV.
The
European
Union:
which
brand
image?
....................................................................................
11
V.
Three
countries,
three
brand
images:
China,
USA,
Switzerland
....................................................
12
VI.
EU’s
objective
values:
Geography,
History
and
Capital
.................................................................
18
VII.
EU’s
attributive
and
associative
values
.........................................................................................
22
VIII.
Necessity
of
choosing
well
its
message
transmitters
....................................................................
25
IX.
European
President:
what
associative
values?
.............................................................................
28
In
conclusion
.........................................................................................................................................
32
2

3.
Preface
National
brand
image
has
become
an
important
criteria
to
differentiate
countries
on
the
international
stage.
It
influences
the
ranking
of
nations
worldwide,
in
particular
as
regards
their
reputation
-­‐
positive
or
negative.
The
way
a
country
is
perceived
can
make
a
critical
difference
to
the
success
of
its
business,
trade
and
tourism
efforts,
as
well
as
its
diplomatic
and
cultural
relations
with
other
nations.
In
case
of
products,
the
success
of
the
brands
–
its
«Success
Story»
–
is
built
around
the
image
that
they
have
developed.
The
success
of
this
image
could
be
extrapolated
to
the
success
of
the
national
brand,
like
the
USA,
China
or
Switzerland.
Therefore,
building
a
positive
brand
image
or
reinforcing
the
existing
one
(rebranding)
has
become
an
outmost
necessity.
Setting
objectives
for
the
elements
that
create
the
brand
identity
of
Europe
is
a
real
opportunity.
Its
history
and
values
are
top
assets
that
give
Europe
all
the
chances
of
succeeding
in
(re)building
its
image.
It
is
beyond
doubt
the
Europe’s
«Success
Story»
that
will
empower
the
European
Union
to
(re)build
its
image
–
its
brand
image.
3

4. I. One
image
for
a
brand?
One
image
for
a
country?
It
is
impossible
to
think
of
a
product
without
attaching
a
name
to
it,
a
brand
–
the
image
that
it
has
developed.
It
is
the
same
for
a
country;
anyone
of
us
attaches
the
image
that
corresponds
to
it.
This
image
is
being
built
continuously,
through
the
messages
that
it
communicates.
The
image
of
a
person,
of
a
product,
of
a
country,
they
are
all
being
built
every
day.
Consciously
or
not,
the
brand
image
finds
its
roots
in
the
history
and
in
the
differences
that
sets
it
apart.
Adapting
or
not
to
changes,
succeeding
or
not,
they
are
all
elements
that
contribute
to
the
creation
of
a
brand
image,
of
a
powerful
or
not
«Success
Story».
However,
a
brand
is
slowly
vanishing
if
it
does
not
adapt
to
changes
around
it.
How
many
brands
have
we
come
across
in
the
last
twenty
years?
How
many
and
which
of
them
have
survived?
It
is
only
the
ones
that
have
embraced
the
change
(such
as
Chanel,
Porsche,
etc.).
The
other
ones
have
disappeared
or
have
been
replaced
by
new
ones
that
would,
most
certainly,
have
the
same
fate.
Unless,
they
continuously
work
on
their
image
and
have
in
mind
the
fact
that
competition
is
a
permanent
reality
for
nations,
as
it
is
for
the
big
corporations.
Usually
what
makes
the
difference
is
the
existence
or
not
of
a
«Success
Story»
linked
to
the
brand.
Sometimes
a
brand
can
be
so
present
and
powerful
that
it
coincides
with
the
product,
to
the
extent
that
it
becomes
a
generic
term.
A
McDonald
or
a
Quick
for
a
hamburger,
a
Jeep
for
a
4X4,
a
Bic
for
a
ball
point
pen,
an
Esquimau
for
a
chocolate
covered
ice
cream
bar,
a
K-­‐way,
a
Thermos
or
a
Caddie.
Sometimes
a
brand
lasts
over
time
and
is
part
of
our
daily
associations
(Chanel,
Citroën,
Airbus,
Coca
Cola,
Marlboro,
Mars,
Lu,
Lacoste,
Kellog’s,
etc.).
Brands
are,
therefore,
part
of
our
everyday
life
consciously,
but
most
often
unconsciously:
they
are
often
associated
to
an
image
–
in
general
positive.
Big
brands
and
implicitly
the
products
to
which
they
gave
their
names
last
over
time.
In
case
of
countries,
it’s
their
History
which
supports
them
in
building
an
image
that
reflects
their
values.
Be
they
small,
like
Switzerland,
or
big,
such
as
the
USA
or
China,
their
national
brands
are
built
in
different
ways
and
through
different
spans
of
time:
over
the
last
two
centuries
for
the
USA,
over
the
last
thirty
years
for
China
and
over
time,
in
general,
for
Switzerland,
Each
country
has
its
own
image
–
like
a
DNA
–
that
gives
it
a
certain
ranking
on
the
international
stage.
It
gives
a
certain
colour
to
the
country,
reflecting
all
its
social,
economic,
political
aspects.
Having
an
international
ranking
means
having
an
international
reputation.
And
this
is
being
built
through
the
values
and
differences
that
the
country
holds.
Reputation
expands
through
the
nation’s
capacity
to
do
so,
but
sometimes,
also
through
the
weakness
of
other
nations:
it
is
never
a
4

5. permanent
state,
but
in
a
continuous
evolution
and
it
survives
only
if
the
country
adapts
its
communication
to
the
global
changes.
Actually,
brand
image
decreases
rapidly
when
communication
is
slow
or
unclear.
For
the
European
Union,
the
slowness
in
responses
and
the
diversity
of
speeches
during
the
August
2011
crisis
led
to
blurring
its
image.
Only
by
adapting
its
messages
to
the
changes
and
to
the
others
will
allow
Europe
to
achieve
a
clear
brand
image
and
a
clear
place
on
the
international
ranking.
Adaptation
to
the
others
–
especially
to
the
emerging
countries
and
their
growing
economic
powers
–
will
offer
the
possibility
to
build
a
strong
and
positive
brand
image,
based
on
the
identity
of
the
brand
“European
Union”.
5

6. II. A
positive
and
strong
brand
image:
an
identity
for
Europe
A
strong
brand
image
gives
the
ability
to
compete
with
other
national
powers
and
to
position
oneself
on
the
international
stage.
A
positive
brand
image
is
a
crucial
necessity
for
nations.
It’s
a
response
to
the
ones
that
have
already
built
their
national
brand
and
keep
on
developing
it.
Emerging
nations,
such
as
Brazil,
India
or
China,
have
well
understood
it.
Building
–
or
rebuilding
–
a
brand
image
can
be
done
in
three
stages:
- Image
assessment
- A
«Success
Story»
- Communication
plan.
6

7. III. Assessment
of
the
EU’s
brand
image
Assessing
EU’s
image
starts
with
assessing
EU’s
ranking
in
the
Nation
Brands
Index
for
the
last
couple
of
years
(2008/2009/2010/2011)1
and
identifying
the
countries’
standings
over
time.
2008 2009 2010 2011
1. Germany United States (+6) United States (=) United States (=)
2. France France (=) Germany (+1) Germany (=)
3. United Kingdom Germany (-2) France (-1) United Kingdom (+1)
4. Canada United Kingdom (-1) United Kingdom (=) France (-1)
5. Japan Japan (=) Japan (=) Japan (=)
6. Italy Italy (=) Canada (+1) Canada (=)
7. United States Canada (-3) Italy (-1) Italy (=)
8. Switzerland Switzerland (=) Switzerland (=) Australia (+1)
9. Australia Australia (=) Australia (=) Switzerland (-1)
10. Sweden Spain, Sweden (=) Sweden (=) Sweden (=)
18. Finland Belgium (+2)
The
index
shows
several
significant
evolutions:
USA:
After
an
important
shift
from
the
7th
place
in
2008
to
the
1st
one
in
2009,
the
United States continues to lead the world in global image for the last three
years. Is
this
important
rise
in
global
ranking
linked
to
the
personality
or
image
of
Barack
Obama?
France:
Fall
from
the
2nd
place
(in
2008
and
2009)
to
the
3rd
(2010)
and
respectively
4th
place
in
2011.
1
Source:
Anholt-­‐Gfk
Roper
Nation
Brands
Index™.
Based
on
surveys
in
20
developed
and
developing
countries,
the
Anholt-­‐GfK
Roper
Nation
Brands
Index
(released
since
2005)
measures
the
power
and
quality
of
50
countries
'brand
image'
by
combining
the
following
six
dimensions:
exports,
governance,
culture
and
heritage,
people,
tourism
and
investment
and
immigration.
7

8. Germany:
Kept
its
ranking
in
top
3
worldwide:
after
a
fall
of
two
positions,
from
the
top
leading
country
in
2008
to
the
3rd
one
in
2009,
Germany
revives
to
the
2nd
place
in
2010
and
holds
the
position
in
2011.
United
kingdom:
Shift
from
the
3rd
place
(2008)
to
the
4th
one
(2009
and
2010)
and
back
to
the
3rd
in
2011.
Italy:
Fall
from
the
6th
place
to
the
7th
one
in
2010
and
2011.
Among
the
first
four
big
European
countries
present
in
the
index
only
Germany
and
United
Kingdom
moved
up
in
the
world
ranking.
We
could
therefore
question
whether
the
brand
image
of
a
nation
is
linked
to
the
personality
or
to
the
brand
image
of
its
leaders.
Does
the
Nation
Brand
Index
show
any
stability?
Yes.
Japan
(5th)
and
Sweden
(10th).
These
countries
hold
the
same
position
over
the
last
four
years.
Is
this
stability
linked
to
a
weak
personalisation
of
power?
As
regards
the
developing
nations
–
Brazil,
China,
India
–
ranked
beyond
the
20th
in
2008,
recorded
significant
gains
during
the
last
four
years.
However,
in
the
light
of
this
index,
a
conclusive
statement
shows
up:
the
European
Union
does
not
appear
as
a
general
entity.
And,
consequently,
it
is
not
seen
as
a
nation
brand
on
the
world
stage.
Or,
if
an
index
can
clarify
the
assessment
of
nation
brands,
the
absence
of
the
European
Union
as
an
entity
–
while
being
the
world
leader
in
terms
of
GDP
(17,9
mil
$)
before
the
USA
(15,06
mil
$)2
–
is
also
a
conclusive
evidence.
Exactly
as
a
virtual
group
lacking
any
links
to
reality,
which
shows
its
limits
sooner
or
later.
The
virtual
tool
Facebook,
for
instance,
has
understood
this
and,
therefore,
passed
rapidly
to
real
field
operations.
The
humanoid
robot
of
Honda,
Asimo,
has
also
become
an
example
of
conviviality
and
of
shift
from
the
virtual
to
the
real
world,
by
shaking
the
hands
of
various
heads
of
states.
These
two
examples
–
Facebook
and
Asimo
–
which
success
among
the
public
had
no
precedent,
prove
the
necessity
to
go
out
of
a
virtual,
self-­‐contained
world,
which
lost
the
contact
with
the
real
world.
In
case
of
the
European
Union,
don’t
we
face
the
same
problem:
shifting
from
the
virtual
to
the
real
world
in
order
to
revitalise
the
European
sentiment?
2
Source
:
International
Monetary
Fund
–
2011
data;
www.imf.org
8

9. The
European
civil
servants
They
have
clearly
expressed
the
need
of
a
pragmatic
approach
of
the
European
Union,
as
revealed
by
a
recent
survey3.
At
the
question:
“What
possible
measures
to
revitalise
the
European
sentiment?”
82%
answer:
“common
position
on
foreign
policies”.
European
Union
should
adopt
more
coherent
positions
on
international
conflicts
such
as
those
recently
in
North
Africa.
At
the
question:
“The
European
sentiment;
Rise
or
fall?”
62%
admit
that
there
is
a
negative
evolution.
The
European
citizens
When
assessing
Europe’s
brand
image,
the
opinions
of
its
citizens
are
a
salient
point.
The
following
list4
covers
several
areas
on
which
the
European
Union
should
work
in
order
to
improve
the
European
integration
sentiment
among
its
citizens.
‘Freedom
to
travel,
study
and
work
within
the
EU’
is
at
the
top
of
associations
with
the
EU
(45%),
ahead
of
the
‘euro’
(38%).
They
are
followed
by:
‘waste
of
money’
(24%),
‘peace’
(22%),
‘an
important
voice
in
the
world’
(21%),
‘bureaucracy’
(21%).
The
list
is
interesting
to
be
analyzed.
Particularly
it
concerns
the
image
of
the
EU,
as
seen
by
its
citizens:
democracy
is,
for
example,
associated
with
the
EU
by
1
in
5
Europeans,
a
fall
by
3
points
since
spring
2010.
For
both
European
civil
servants
and
European
citizens,
the
brand
image
assessment
of
the
European
Union
is
clear:
- An
Europe
associated
mostly
with
negative
aspects
Ø Waste
of
money
(24%)
Ø Bureaucracy
(21%)
Ø Unemployment
(14%)
Ø Not
so
much
democracy
(20%),
nor
peace
(22%)
- An
Europe
which
“doesn’t
listen
to
its
citizens»5
Ø Barely
3
in
10
Europeans
fell
their
voice
counts
in
the
EU.
3
Survey
realised
for
the
Foundation
for
European
Progressive
Studies
(FEPS),
July
2011,
among
231
EU
civil
servants.
4
Source
:
Eurobarometer
75,
spring
2011
(Public
opinion
in
the
European
Union);
5
EB
75
(QA21a.2-­‐4
:
‘My
voice
counts
in
the
EU’
:
30%
tend
to
agree,
62%
tend
to
disagree,
8%
don’t
know).
9

10. - An
Europe
misunderstood
in
its
way
of
functioning6
Ø Almost
one
in
two
Europeans
does
not
understand
how
the
EU
works.
- An
Europe
which
doesn’t
inform
enough
its
citizens7
Ø 7
in
10
Europeans
don’t
feel
well
informed
about
the
European
matters.
-
An
Europe
with
less
and
less
accredited
journalists8
(to
inform
more
than
500
million
Europeans
and
the
rest
of
the
world)
Ø 1300
in
2005
Ø 752
in
2010
- An
Europe
with
a
single
European
media
(EuroparlTV)
Ø Available
only
online
Ø 900
TV
viewers
per
day
on
average,
for
500
million
citizens;
that
is
1
in
500.000
Europeans
9
- An
Europe
without
a
strong
identity10
Ø 3
in
5
Europeans
think
of
themselves
as
citizens
of
the
EU,
but
less
than
a
quarter
is
definitely
sure
about
that
(23%).
Associated
with
negative
aspects,
not
listening
to
its
citizens
and
not
informing
them
enough,
misunderstood
in
the
way
it
works,
with
less
and
less
accredited
journalist
and
only
one
European
media,
Europe’s
image
reveals
as
rather
negative
from
this
assessment.
6
EB
75
(QA21a.1.:
‘I
understand
how
the
EU
works’:
45%
tend
to
agree;
49%
tend
to
disagree;
6%
don’t
know).
7
EB
74,
autumn
2010
(QD2
:
two
thirds
of
Europeans,
66%,
don’t
fell
informed
about
European
matters,
while
32%
feel
well
informed).
8
Source
:
International
Press
Organisation
;
www.api-­‐ipa.eu
9
Source:
Draft
report,
Committee
of
Budgetary
Control,
European
Parliament,
3
February
2011.
10
EB
75
(QD4:
‘You
feel
you
are
a
citizen
of
the
EU’
:
total
Yes
-­‐
62%
;
total
No
–
36%;
‘Yes,
definitely’
–
23%
).
10

11. IV. The
European
Union:
which
brand
image?
The
ambiguity
of
the
EU
image
problem
is
that
every
member
state
out
of
the
27
builds
its
own
image.
And
further
on,
inside
the
countries,
regions,
communities,
cantons,
towns
etc.,
they
develop
their
image
very
often.
At
every
level
of
power,
everyone
tries
to
make
a
difference
and
gain
its
reputation.
This
state
of
play
would
not
be
a
problem
if
the
EU
was
the
common
denominator.
The
USA,
with
its
50
states,
has
shown
that
a
global
image
can
cover
the
differences.
This
Union
of
all
its
States
is
reinforced
by
a
single
spokesperson,
the
President
of
the
United
States:
he
is
the
common
denominator
which
supports
the
brand
image
of
the
entire
nation.
On
the
contrary,
in
case
of
the
European
Union,
the
image
role
of
a
spokesperson
as
well
as
his/her
mission
as
common
denominator
are
not
clearly
defined.
Moreover,
this
function
seems
to
be
bypassed
by
the
big
nations
which
have
a
historical
role
in
the
development
of
the
European
Union.
Aren’t
we
hearing
more
often
about
Nicolas
Sarkozy
and
Angela
Merkel
than
about
Herman
Van
Rompuy?
Therefore,
we
could
ask
ourselves
whether
the
European
Union
is
identified
or
distinguished
under
these
circumstances:
it
seems
sometimes
drowned
in
the
vagueness,
due
to
the
slowness
of
responses
and
the
depersonalisation
of
power.
Developing
the
European
brand
image
rises
as
a
clear
question
for
our
leaders.
And
real
capacities
of
doing
it
exist.
The
EU
can
actually
rely
on
its
objective
values,
such
as
its
geography
or
its
history.
It
can
also
rely
on
its
attributive
values
developed
over
time.
All
together,
these
values
–
objective
and
attributive
–
give
to
the
European
Union
the
means
of
an
authentic
«Success
Story»,
the
key
of
building
its
brand
image.
While
there
are
plenty
of
success
stories
worldwide,
nations
–
big
or
small
–
devote
resources
which
differ
quite
often.
Three
examples
of
nation
branding:
China,
USA
and
Switzerland.
11

12. V. Three
countries,
three
brand
images:
China,
USA,
Switzerland
Country
brand
image
can
be
analysed
through
three
concrete
examples
-­‐
a
small
country
:
Switzerland;
two
big
countries:
the
USA
and
China
–
by
considering
three
non-­‐restrictive
criteria:
geography,
history,
nation
branding
process.
Three
ways
to
communicate
a
brand
image
CHINA
USA
SWITZERLAND
Surface11
9.64
mil
km2
9.63
mil
km2
41.290
km2
(2nd
place
in
the
world)
(3rd
place
in
the
world)
(132nd
place
in
the
world)
State
creation
221
BC
1777
1848
(foundation
of
a
united
(creation
of
the
USA
as
a
(creation
of
the
Swiss
empire
within
China,
confederation
of
states;
Confederation;
adoption
of
under
the
Qin
dynasty)
adoption
of
the
Articles
the
Swiss
Federal
of
Confederation
by
the
Constitution)
13
founding
states)
Nation
branding
Fast
Fast
Slow
process
13
(since
2008
–
(rebuilding
since
2008 )
(since
2001
–
12
The
Olympic
Games
)
creation
of
PRESENCE
14
SWITZERLAND ,
governmental
organisation
in
charge
of
the
nation
brand
image
abroad)
It
can
be
seen
that
being
small
or
big,
or
having
a
long
or
short
history
as
a
state,
are
not
in
themselves
decisive
criteria
of
building
the
nation
brand
image.
11
Source
:
Statistiques
mondiales
(http://www.statistiques-­‐mondiales.com)
12
According
to
the
Anholt-­‐GfK
Roper
Nation
Brand
Index
13
According
to
the
Anholt-­‐GfK
Roper
Nation
Brand
Index
14
Source
:
Presence
Switzerland
on
http://www.image-­‐switzerland.ch/index.php?id=5&L=1
12

13. 1. China
The
recent
events
organised
in
China
-­‐
Shanghai
World
Expo
2010,
Beijing
2008
Olympic
Games
–
stand
as
proof
of
exemplary
success
stories
of
event
organisation
and
country
image
promotion.
Although
a
fast
nation
branding
finds
its
roots
in
the
historical
past
of
the
nation,
the
main
focus
is
on
the
success
of
its
present
and,
among
others,
on
the
organisation
of
big
events
with
global
media
coverage.
This
refers
to
the
importance
of
the
event
communication
when
building
a
nation
brand
image.
It
should,
therefore,
be
taken
into
account
when
developing
the
communication
plan.
Shanghai
World
Expo
and
Beijing
Olympic
Games
are
structured
as
events,
or
as
a
multitude
of
events.
The
2008
Olympic
Games
show,
for
instance,
that
the
successful
organisation
and
its
global
visibility
are
major
factors
in
developing
a
positive
brand
image
for
China.
For
the
Olympic
Games,
succeeding
–
inter
alia,
in
16
days,
bringing
together
204
countries,
more
than
11.000
athletes
and
2
million
spectators15
-­‐
to
stay
within
a
fixed
budget
and
to
reap
financial
profits
(non-­‐contested),
is
a
major
achievement
for
any
country,
especially
if
its
development
is
recent.
However,
aside
from
this
economic
performance,
it’s
the
media
coverage
in
terms
of
image
that
should
be
commended.
The
strategy
developed
for
the
brand
“China”,
during
the
Beijing
Olympic
Games,
is
not
arbitrary.
Many
elements
have
contributed
to
it,
such
as
the
slogan
“One
world,
one
dream”,
the
mascot
for
visibility,
the
anthem
etc.
China
has
therefore
implemented
–
through
the
Beijing
2008
Olympic
Games
and
the
Shanghai
World
Expo
2010
–
a
specific
strategy
of
brand
image,
which
brought
an
enormous
success
due
to
the
global,
outstanding,
media
coverage.
15
Source
:
http://en.beijing2008.cn/
13

14. 2. USA
The
«Success
Story»
of
the
candidate
Obama
contributed
significantly
to
his
election
in
2008,
and
the
usage
of
the
event
communication
through
meetings
played
a
major
role.
Moreover,
the
electoral
campaign
run
helped
to
gradually
give
a
new
image
to
the
country,
different
than
the
one
given
by
his
predecessors.
The
personalisation
of
the
new
image
developed
by
the
successor
of
George
W.
Bush
was
decisive
for
his
election.
It
has
also
contributed
to
the
global
image
of
the
country,
via
a
media
coverage
without
precedent.
It
needs
to
be
recognised
that
these
two
administrations,
Obama
and
Bush,
have
two
different
visions
of
governing:
Obama
administration
proposed
a
rigorous,
open
debate
on
all
issues,
promoting
different
opinions.
Bush
administration
was
proposing
consensus.
The
choice
of
the
spokesperson
and
his
personal
aura
play
also
an
important
role.
The
electors
were
not
mistaken,
and
therefore
this
personal
«Success
Story»
-­‐
Obama
–
allowed
to
revive
the
belief
in
a
nation
«Success
Story».
However,
what
is
without
any
doubt
the
most
remarkable
about
this,
is
the
number
of
persons
who
formed
the
team
of
Obama:
three
–
not
more
-­‐
ensured
the
management,
built
the
strategy
and
led
the
communication
campaign
in
2007
and
2008.
The
same
goes
for
2012:
the
number
stays
unchanged
for
the
forthcoming
presidential
elections.
14

15. The
electoral
campaign
Electoral
campaign
2008
Electoral
campaign
2012
ONE
TEAM
–
3
PERSONS
ONE
TEAM
–
3
PERSONS
1. David
Plouffe
–
Campaign
manager
1. Jim
Messina
–
Campaign
manager
2. David
Axelrod
–
Strategist
2. David
Plouffe
-­‐
Strategist
3. Robert
Gibbs
–
Communication
manager
3. Robert
Gibbs
–
Communication
manager
It
is
therefore
possible
to
succeed
with
a
small,
complementary
team,
motivated
and
efficient,
which
gives
the
right
answers
on
the
communication
strategy
involved
in
an
electoral
campaign.
Obama’s
team
has
built
the
image
of
the
future
president
during
the
whole
campaign,
through
many
meetings
which
made
that
the
«Success
Story»
of
a
man
become
the
«Success
Story»
of
the
entire
US
nation.
The
abilities
of
adaptation
and
response
to
changes
have
been
direct
and
omnipresent.
Without
any
complex,
clumsy
speech
or
action,
which
are
incompatible
with
the
citizens’
expectations:
a
clear
answer
to
their
questions
and
expectations.
15

16. 3. Switzerland
Switzerland’s
brand
-­‐
slow
but
steady
building
process
-­‐
is
based
on
3
elements:
the
accomplishments,
the
values
and
the
appearances16:
The
Accomplishments:
its
stability,
associated
by
everyone
with
the
country,
but
also
its
corollary:
a
secure
future
and
the
impression
of
equilibrium
that
emerges.
It
is
not
surprisingly
that
Switzerland
is
a
renowned
international
hub,
which
future
is
reassured
by
the
self-­‐determination
of
the
Swiss
people
to
shape
their
country
over
time.
The
permanent
concern
for
efficiency
gives
to
Switzerland
the
image
of
a
nation
with
many
accomplishments.
The
Values
that
built
Switzerland
over
time
are
based
on
the
authenticity
of
the
country
which
gives
credibility
and
a
discrete
superiority.
The
openness
to
the
others
and
the
positive
curiosity
–
proof
of
freshness,
according
to
the
analyses
–
make
Swiss
values
trustworthy.
The
Appearances
-­‐
in
the
positive
sense
of
the
term
–
are
what
the
country
shows:
a
beautiful
alpine
habitat,
a
kind
people
and
a
Swiss
cross
on
its
flag/
logo,
which
inspired
the
Red
Cross
–
another
positive
entity
–
by
switching
the
colours.
16
Source
:
Presence
Switzerland’s
webpage/
Brand
Switzerland
:
http://www.image-­‐switzerland.ch
16

17. Nation
brand
image
is
therefore
being
built
differently
every
time,
but
always
around
a
«Success
Story».
- For
the
USA:
one
of
a
person:
President
Obama;
- For
China:
one
of
its
accomplishments,
largely
covered
by
the
media:
the
Olympic
Games
and
the
Shanghai
Expo;
- For
Switzerland:
one
of
the
country’s
personality
developed
over
time.
For
the
European
Union
the
ideal
would
be
to
put
together
all
these
three
elements.
However
a
good
start
would
be
to
analyse
what
already
exists.
For
example
identifying
the
values
–
objective
and
attributive
–
that
the
EU
has
in
order
to
build
its
own
«Success
Story».
17

18. VI. EU’s
objective
values:
Geography,
History
and
Capital
EU’s
geography,
a
space
for
500
million
Europeans,
EU’s
history
covering
already
three
generations,
EU’s
capital
–
Brussels
–
are
unquestionable
objective
values
for
building
a
«Success
Story».
1. A
space
for
500
million
Europeans
With
more
than
4.3
million
km2
for
more
than
500
million
inhabitants17,
the
27
member
states
are,
in
themselves,
already
a
proof
of
success.
The
success
of
a
strong
European
Union
-­‐
a
single
entity
which
brought
together
27
states
–
that
answers
to
the
need
of
joining
in
order
to
become
stronger.
Even
if
the
country
is
one
of
the
world’s
largest
powers
–
like
Germany,
France,
United
Kingdom,
Spain
or
Italy
-­‐
with
an
important
role
in
the
world
over
time,
the
History
of
the
last
five
years
proves
the
need
to
join
in
order
to
play
a
role
amid
other
large
nations
on
the
international
stage.
With
respect
to
the
surface,
population
and
number
of
members
states18,
let’s
take
a
look
on
the
world’s
map
and
see
the
place
of
the
European
Union
compared
to
USA
and
the
BRIC
countries
(Brazil,
Russia,
India
and
China).
SURFACE
POPULATION
NUMBER
OF
MEMBER
STATES
EU
4.300.000
km2
(5)
502.400.000
(3)
27
national
states
USA
9.630.000
km2
(3)
313.200.000
(4)
50
federal
states
BRAZIL
8.500.000
km2
(4)
203.400.000
(5)
26
federal
states
RUSSIA
17.070.000
km2
(1)
138.700.000
(6)
21
federal
republics
INDIA
3.200.000
km2
(6)
1.180.000.000
(2)
28
federal
states
CHINA
9.640.000
km2
(2)
1.330.000.000
(1)
2
large
states
Thus,
it
can
be
seen
that,
compared
to
major
world
powers
such
as
USA
or
China,
EU’s
surface
is
barely
half
of
theirs.
But
its
population,
even
if
it
surpasses
the
USA’s,
doesn’t
reach
the
size
of
the
large
emerging
powers
such
as
China
or
India.
17
Source
:
Eurostat
18
Source
:
www.statistiques-­‐mondiales.com
(July
2011)
18

19. 2. A
history
for
three
generations
Back
in
1950,
6
European
countries
started
the
foundation
of
a
European
Union19
-­‐
Belgium,
France,
Germany,
Italy,
Luxembourg
and
the
Netherlands
–
driven
by
remarkable
persons
such
as:
Jean
Monnet,
Robert
Schuman,
Konrad
Adenauer,
Alcide
De
Gasperi,
Paul-­‐Henri
Spaak
or
Jean
Rey.
But
it’s
in
1971
that
the
EMS
(European
Monetary
System)
is
created.
And
in
1973
the
6
members
states
become
9,
with
the
arrival
of
Denmark,
Ireland
and
United
Kingdom.
The
European
Union
shows
at
that
time
an
important
rise
in
terms
of
power
and
becomes
a
real
challenger
at
international
level.
This
first
stage
of
the
EU’s
history
has
taken
23
years
–
one
generation.
The
second
stage
lasts
22
years,
from
1973
to
1995.
It’s
the
stage
of
rising
and
development.
From
9
members
states
the
European
Union
passes
to
15,
with
the
arrival
of
Greece,
Spain,
Portugal,
Austria,
Finland
and
Sweden.
Schengen
space
is
created
(in
1985)
and
the
European
Monetary
System
becomes
the
European
Monetary
Union
(EMU)
in
1991.
However
the
first
clouds
appear
during
this
phase
marred
by
a
first
rejection
of
the
Maastricht
Treaty
(1992).
Is
it
therefore
this
aspect
that
made
the
EU
lose
face
as
a
challenger
and
marred
the
image
of
a
leader
in
progress?
An
image
built
throughout
more
than
a
generation.
The
third
stage
can
be
considered
to
start
as
of
1995.
The
European
Union
enters
a
maturity
phase
in
which,
quite
often,
the
accomplishments
take
over
the
capacities
of
adapting
to
change.
This
stage,
lasting
for
a
decade,
sees
the
number
of
member
states
growing
from
15
to
25
in
2004,
with
the
accession
of
Cyprus,
Czech
Republic,
Estonia,
Hungary,
Latvia,
Lithuania,
Malta,
Poland,
Slovakia
and
Slovenia,
and
reaching
27
in
2007
with
Bulgaria
and
Romania.
The
European
Central
Bank
is
created
in
1998,
the
Euro
in
1999
and,
as
of
2002,
the
European
currency
becomes
the
single
currency
used
by
12
member
states.
It
reaches
17
in
2011.
Nonetheless,
this
doesn’t
impede
that
more
and
more
clouds
arrive
over
the
European
sky,
despite
a
general
refrain
to
see
them
or
to
measure
their
importance.
The
delays
in
ratifying
the
Nice
Treaty
(2001-­‐2002),
the
rejection
of
the
European
Constitution
(2005)
or
the
refusal
of
Euro
by
3
out
of
15
Eurozone
members
states
(at
its
launching)
are
the
visible
side
of
a
far
deeper
problem:
the
weak
support
for
the
EU
membership.
As
a
logical
consequence,
after
maturity,
then
comes
ageing.
The
same
goes
for
the
European
Union
which
seems
to
enter,
as
of
2005,
an
ageing
phase,
or
at
least
of
stagnation:
confirming
the
passage
from
challenger-­‐leader
to
follower.
Europe
seems
to
shut
itself
from
the
rest
of
the
world,
withdrawn
on
its
accomplishments
but
also
on
its
heavy
and
complex
body.
What
would
the
next
stage
be
in
2012?
The
one
of
a
choice:
either
continuing
as
a
follower,
or
becoming
again
the
leader
that
it
was.
Many
elements
come
into
play.
Among
them,
the
rebuilding
of
its
brand
image.
19
Called
at
that
time
the
European
Coal
and
Steel
Community;
www.europa.eu
19

20. 3. A
capital.
Brussels
In
every
big
country
the
capital
plays
a
major
role
and
is
often
the
element
that
we
keep
in
mind:
Washington,
Brasilia,
New
Delhi,
Moscow
are
windows
of
visibility
for
their
respective
nations.
The
same
rule
applies
for
the
EU
as
well:
the
capital
is
its
window.
In
Brussels
more
than
85.000
people
hover
around
EU
(out
of
one
million
inhabitants).
Capital
of
Belgium
first
of
all,
since
1830;
Brussels
has
developed
as
a
multicultural
city-­‐region
which
became
the
European
capital
in
1958,
but
officially
in
1992.
The
region
of
Brussels-­‐Capital
is
a
real
international
hub
for
the
institutions
located
here
and
for
the
geographical
proximity
that
it
offers
with
respect
to
other
large
European
cities
such
as
London,
Paris,
Amsterdam
or
Bonn.
Second
largest
lobby
centre
in
the
world
(after
Washington)
and
the
most
coveted
by
the
diplomats,
the
capital
of
Europe
is
a
real
multicultural
metropolis
whose
figures
speak
for
themselves.
INTERNATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS20
EUROPEAN
INSTITUTIONS21
- 555
diplomatic
missions
- 5
European
institutions:
Ø European Commission
- 5.415
diplomats
Ø European Parliament
Ø Council of the European Union
- 15.000
to
20.000
lobbyists
Ø European Economic and Social
Committee
- 4.000
NATO
employees
Ø Committee of the Regions
- 1.319
foreign
journalists
- Around
50.000
European
civil
servants
and
agents
(temporary,
contract,
interim,
national
experts)
Total
number
of
staff
More
than
80.000
Population
(Brussels)
1.142.000
inhabitants22,
out
of
which
50%
have
foreign
origins
The
reality
in
Brussels
speaks
for
itself:
more
than
80.000
people
work
in
European
or
international
organisations,
out
of
slightly
more
than
one
million
inhabitants.
20
Source:
Study
of
the
Brussels-­‐Europe
Liaison
Office
(November
2011);
www.blbe.be
21
Source
:
European
institutions’
WebPages.
22
Source
:
Belgian
National
Register
(November
2011
data).
20

21. But
the
main
characteristic
of
Brussels
is
that
it
hosts
more
than
50%
foreigners,
thus
making
it
a
multicultural
and
multilingual
city.
Lying
on
the
division
line
between
the
Latin
and
German
cultures,
Brussels
could
enjoy
the
benefit
of
being
the
bridge
between
these
two
worlds
and
the
image
of
their
coexistence.
This
should
be
an
opportunity
to
show
to
the
entire
world
that
the
European
capital
is
an
example
of
cohesion.
However,
there
might
be
a
drawback
as
Brussels
is
showing
sometimes
a
complete
different
image:
the
capital
of
a
country
without
government
during
more
than
one
year
and
whose
two
communities
are
in
opposition.
The
contrary
of
the
image
that
EU
should
give.
The
«Success
Story»
of
Europe
must
be
built
around
a
capital:
the
brand
image
of
Europe
passes
through
the
brand
image
of
its
capital.
Therefore
Brussels
deserves
a
great
attention.
The
Geography,
the
History
and
the
Capital
of
the
EU
are
there
to
create
a
«Success
Story»
around
the
objective
values
they
embody.
21

22. VII. EU’s
attributive
and
associative
values
A
brand
or
a
product
becomes
an
idea
by
associating,
attributing
values
to
it.
And
the
idea
is
often
an
image
that
we
attach
to
it.
This
image
is,
at
its
turn,
attached
to
codes
that
help
expressing
it
in
different
ways.
These
codes
relate
sometimes
or
quite
often,
among
other
things,
to
the
past
or
History
that
are
inherent
to
us
consciously
or
unconsciously.
Values
like
courage
or
heroism
can
be
associated
to
a
person,
a
group
or
a
brand
in
order
to
build
their
«Success
Story».
For
instance,
the
association
with
the
pilots
of
Royal
Air
Force
is
obvious
for
the
Breitling
watches,
as
the
pilots
used
them.
Other
associations
can
be
recalled
as
well,
such
as:
- The
suffering
by
the
high-­‐level
athletes
and
their
respective
country
:
China;
- The
idea
of
freedom
and
Apple;
- The
idea
of
a
democratic
comfort
and
Ikea;
- The
beauty
and
L’Oreal.
Among
the
associative
values,
the
“emotional
brands”
are
without
any
doubt
the
most
significant
in
a
brand
strategy.
As
we
have
seen,
they
can
relate
to
the
heroism
in
the
History,
thus
contributing
to
the
«Success
Story»
of
the
brand.
The
choice
of
colours
and
stars
for
the
European
flag
is
part
of
these
“emotional
brands»
and
answers,
in
a
certain
way,
to
the
expectations,
desires
and
dreams
of
the
European
citizens:
it
is
therefore
one
of
the
associative
values
of
Europe.
However
strategists
should
be
cautious
when
choosing
the
best
way
of
representing
this
answer
to
expectations,
as
the
associative
values
can
take
different
shapes,
positive
or
negative.
For
example,
there
should
be
an
adequate
answer
to
the
human
concern
towards
the
technological
progress:
a
humanoid
robot
could
be
the
image
of
such
a
reconciliation
of
man
with
technology.
The
humanoid
robot
Asimo,
developed
by
Honda,
was
designed
as
a
technological
tool
with
human
appearance
in
order
to
give
it
some
associative
values.
It
could
have
stayed
as
a
research
object
and
be
presented
as
such
to
the
scientists
or
students.
But
it
wasn’t
the
case.
Among
the
associative
values
embodied
by
Asimo,
we
can
recall
the
conviviality.
It
was
represented
by
associating
the
robot
with
the
world’s
great
leaders
(kings/presidents/
spokespersons/
prime-­‐
22

23. ministers
etc.)
whose
hands
he
was
shaking.
The
gesture
attracted
a
large
media
coverage,
making
the
robot
the
main
actor
of
a
«Success
Story».
Henceforth,
the
robot
-­‐
technological
tool
since
then
-­‐
became
humanoid
by
associating
its
notoriety
with
the
one
of
various
State
authorities:
the
King
of
Spain
(Juan
Carlos),
the
Queen
of
Denmark
(Margrethe
II),
the
German
counsellor
(Schröder),
or
different
Prime
ministers:
Turkish
(Erdogan),
Japanese
(Koizumi),
Belgian
(Verhofdstadt).
The
Head
of
States
–
vested
with
power
and
reputation
in
their
countries
–
associated
their
names
to
the
robot’s
and
showed
their
interest
in
research
and
development,
as
well
as
in
the
reconciliation
of
man
with
technology.
By
doing
this,
they
offered
new
associative
values
to
their
country’s
brand.
It
is
therefore
obvious
that
the
associative
values
that
can
be
attributed
to
a
product,
a
region,
a
state
or
a
place
can
take
various
shapes.
Other
examples:
the
smell,
the
taste;
they
play
an
important
role
in
the
memorisation
process,
by
acting
on
our
feelings.
For
instance,
some
of
us
may
associate
the
lavender
fragrance
with
the
region
of
Provence
and
its
values;
some
others
may
associate
the
clothes
well-­‐ordered
in
a
wardrobe
with
memories
from
their
childhood.
The
importance
of
the
smell
can
be
subtly
used
in
a
branding
strategy
which
involves
associative
values,
such
as
Nescafé,
for
example.
It
uses
the
image
of
roasting
coffee
injected
in
capsules,
thus
associating
the
taste
with
the
smell
of
coffee
for
the
whole
brand.
Do
the
same
rules
apply
in
case
of
nations?
Can
we
associate
the
image
of
a
nation
(USA)
with
the
taste
of
a
product
(Coca-­‐Cola),
the
image
of
France
with
the
taste
of
wine,
Italy
with
their
pastas?
However
the
smell
or
the
taste
are
not
the
single
values
that
can
be
associated
to
a
product
or
a
nation.
The
sight,
the
hearing
or
the
touch
allow
also
to
shape
the
image
that
we
have
of
a
product
or
country,
and
possibly
to
build
or
rebuild
one.
On
the
basis
of
these
elements
we
can
ask
ourselves
what
values
could
be
associated
with
the
European
Union.
The
starting
point
could
be
to
decode
what
already
exists,
to
draw
up
a
state-­‐of-­‐
play
of
the
current
situation
of
the
EU,
a
sort
of
DNA
of
its
image.
- Seeing
the
Blue
European
flag
with
its
twelve
yellow
stars
in
a
circle
creates
a
quick
and
direct
link
with
Europe.
Unlike
the
USA,
whose
number
of
stars
on
the
flag
has
been
adapted
to
the
number
of
states,
the
European
flag
kept
the
twelve
stars
for
its
27
members
states.
It
symbolises
the
ideals
of
solidarity
and
unity.
Nonetheless,
the
EU
uses
some
other
logos
as
well,
which
could
perpetuate
risks
of
confusion:
logos
for
each
institution
or
service
(see
the
European
Anti-­‐Fraud
Office
-­‐OLAF,
the
Publication
Office
–
OP
etc.
).
This
situation
creates
doubt
on
the
internal
and
interinstitutional
cooperation
within
EU.
It
is
important
to
remember
that
what
characterises
a
brand
is
the
clarity
of
the
visual
message
that
it
displays:
the
colours
have
to
be
the
same
no
matter
the
media,
and
to
23

24. respect
the
codes.
The
same
goes
for
the
fonts.
Brand
visibility
is
partly
based
on
these
principles.
- Hearing
the
European
anthem:
listening
to
a
certain
music
allows
to
identify,
to
associate
it
to
a
person,
a
product,
a
radio
station,
a
broadcast,
a
country.
The
length,
the
musical
flow,
its
repetitive
broadcasting
(e.g.
jingle
of
a
popular
news
broadcast)
can
quickly
create
or
not
the
association
with
the
brand,
and
contribute
to
the
building
of
the
brand
image.
The
choice
of
Europe
was
the
“Ode
to
Joy”
from
the
Ninth
Symphony
of
Ludwig
Van
Beethoven.
- Touching
the
Euro
is
a
daily
practice
for
a
large
number
of
Europeans,
thus
representing
their
membership/
attachment
to
a
single
economic
area
with
a
single
currency.
More
than
to
its
monetary
value,
it
is
what
the
euro
represents
–
an
identity,
a
name
-­‐
to
which
the
European
is
attached.
But
the
euro
acts
also
as
a
brand
image
vector,
such
as
the
dollar
or
the
Swiss
franc.
- Coming
together
during
the
European
Day
means
associating
the
celebration
with
the
birth
of
the
EU.
Every
nation
has
its
own
national
day
(4th
July
in
the
USA,
14th
July
in
France,
21st
July
in
Belgium,
1st
August
in
Switzerland
etc.),
often
a
summertime
one,
but
always
linked
to
the
history
of
the
country.
For
the
EU,
9th
May
was
chosen
in
relation
with
Robert
Schuman,
who
launched
for
the
first
time,
in
1950,
the
idea
of
a
united
Europe...
- An
official
motto
:“United
in
diversity”
is
part
of
this
set
of
images.
Every
country
has
its
own
motto
which
contributes
to
its
image:
for
Belgium,
“Unity
Makes
Strength”.
As
it
can
be
seen,
an
associative
value
is
not
always
obvious,
however
it
can
be
built
around
the
«Success
Story».
All
these
elements
–
visual
with
the
flag,
hearing
with
the
anthem,
touching
with
the
Euro,
conviviality
with
the
European
Day,
Unity
in
diversity
with
the
motto
–
are
fundamental
for
the
European
brand
image.
They
might
lack
coherence
and
visibility
for
some
people,
but
they
should
be
considered
in
the
assessment
of
the
EU’s
brand
image,
as
associative
values.
Surely
they
are
peripheral
compared
to
the
major
image
problem
of
the
European
Union:
its
physical
representation
and
therefore,
who
is
its
spokesperson?
24

25. VIII. Necessity
of
choosing
well
its
message
transmitters
Who
is
the
spokesperson
of
the
EU?
A
strong
image,
conveyor
of
identity,
chooses
a
spokesperson
commensurate
with
its
ambitions.
And
preferably
a
single
and
unique
spokesperson.
In
the
USA,
there
is
no
doubt;
the
unquestionable
spokesperson
is
the
president
(Barack
Obama).
In
the
European
Union,
things
are
less
clear.
Ø Who
is
the
voice
of
the
EU?
Whom
do
we
associate
with
its
image?
Ø And
by
reference
with
the
USA,
who
is
going
to
shake
the
hand
of
the
president
Obama?
Ø Who
speaks
on
behalf
of
the
EU?
Ø Who
is
the
spokesperson
of
the
EU
and
plays
on
the
same
level
with
the
world’s
great
leaders?
Ø Who
will
have
the
adequate
representativeness
and
charisma?
The
question
has
been
raised,
as
in
the
EU
there
are
currently
5
names:
1) The
European
President:
Herman
Van
Rompuy
(nominated
for
two
years
and
a
half)
2) The
President
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(position
changes
every
six
months)
3) The
President
of
the
European
Commission:
José
Manuel
Barroso
4) The
President
of
the
European
Parliament:
Martin
Schulz
5) The
High
Representative
of
the
Union
for
Foreign
Affairs
and
Security
Policy:
Catherine
Ashton.
In
addition
to
these
5
names,
2
others
can
be
added:
6) The
French
President,
Nicolas
Sarkozy
7) The
German
Chancellor,
Angela
Merkel
25

26. And
the
list
could
go
on
if
we
consider
other
names
as
well,
such
as:
?)
The
27
European
commissioners
(one
for
each
member
state)
?)
The
EU
‘ambassadors’
?)
The
European
civil
servants
sent
in
diplomatic
missions
to
speak
about
EU
in
their
home
towns
This
gives
a
large
number
of
message
transmitters
for
the
EU
and
generates
real
communication
problems.
The
situation
gets
even
more
complicated
if
we
consider
other
recurrent
elements:
- The
Eurojargon
which,
far
from
helping,
locks
up
both
the
transmitters
and
their
messages
in
a
sort
of
a
vacuum;
therefore
they
do
not
reach
their
addressees.
- The
bureaucratic
character
of
the
communication,
which
makes
it
appear
austere.
- The
institutional
labyrinth,
misunderstood
by
the
most
part
of
those
to
whom
the
messages
are
addressed.
All
these
elements
contribute
to
a
deficient
communication
policy.
Seen
from
outside,
we
have
the
impression
of
watching
a
huge
ship
that
sinks
slowly.
Everyone
sticks
to
their
post,
convinced
that
they
do
well
what
they
should
do,
that
they
transmit
the
good
message,
but
without
any
shared
vision.
The
effect
is
obvious:
the
receivers
don’t
perceive
any
consistent
message
in
the
end,
but
only
a
hubbub
coming
from
a
diffuse
group,
with
no
real
leader.
Nevertheless,
the
addressees
are
numerous,
interested
and
demanding.
But,
already
hard-­‐pressed,
they
turn
away
from
the
EU.
Finally,
to
whom
does
the
EU
speak?
Which
is
its
internal
public?
Which
is
its
external
public?
26

27. The
internal
public
- The
European
citizens
are
undoubtedly
the
most
numerous
and
therefore,
the
most
concerned.
It’s
especially
for
them
that
the
EU
must
rebuild
its
image,
draw
a
new
communication
policy
and
instill
a
true
belief.
- The
European
journalists
are
the
main
channel
for
disseminating
the
messages.
They
act
as
the
main
media
relay
between
the
EU
and
its
citizens.
However
this
media
relay
can’t
exist
without
good
working
relations
with
the
entire
profession.
- The
European
civil
servants
are
at
the
same
time
message
receivers,
information
relays
and
message
transmitters.
Each
of
them
is
therefore
an
image
ambassador
of
the
EU.
The
external
public
- The
foreign
citizens,
living
or
not
in
Europe,
are
the
consumers
whom,
behind
an
image,
will
buy
a
product.
This
product
will
be
European
if
the
image
of
Europe
is
positive
an
its
message
is
clearly
transmitted
and
received.
- The
foreign
journalists
–
all
over
the
world
–
are
message
relays
for
Europe.
The
message
must
not
only
be
attractive
and
interesting,
but
it
should
also
be
credible
and
informative.
- The
other
heads
of
states
have
to
find
the
advantages
of
sharing
the
same
media
scene
as
the
European
Union;
this
would
only
be
possible
if
the
brand
image
of
the
EU
is
attractive.
It
is
therefore
by
identifying
the
message
transmitters
–
actors
of
the
Europe’s
image
–
and
the
message
receivers,
that
we
could
give
a
first
answer
to
the
question:
How
can
we
build
a
positive
image
of
the
EU?
27

28. IX. European
President:
what
associative
values?
The
main
transmitter
of
the
message
plays
a
crucial
role
for
the
image
of
the
product,
the
country,
or
the
entity
that
he
represents.
He/
she
acts
as
the
spokesperson
for
the
brand.
The
spokesperson
will
be
associated
with
the
country.
And
this
is
done
almost
automatically
by
those
who
receive
the
message.
If
the
number
of
transmitters
may
cause
confusions,
as
we
have
seen,
separating
the
country
image
from
its
spokesperson
can
lead
to
the
same
consequences.
Far
from
the
person
to
the
related
issue,
the
opinion
of
the
Europeans
–
civil
servants,
citizens,
journalists
-­‐
should
be
considered
in
order
to
assess
their
expectations.
28