CORRELATION OF CONCEPTS «STEREOTYPE», «IMAGE» AND «BRAND»: POLITICAL INSIGHT

Abstract

The article is devoted to the conceptualisation of the concepts «stereotype», «image» and «brand» in the political science dimension. A conceptual dif- ferentiation has been carried out and the relationship between these concepts has been identified.

It is stated that stereotypes are closely connected in a single structure with ar- chetypes, forming brands jointly. Archetypes form the core of brand identity, they are quite difficult to change (however, they are reluctant to be changed). The stereotype is more superficial, it is perceived on an emotional level, and it can be shaped and changed in a certain way. That is why stereotypes are the basis of the image. Actually, a successful image is a successful set of stereotypes.

The brand includes the archetypal component (core) and the stereotypical component (image shell).

At the level of the stereotypical shell of the brand, emotionality reigns. It is difficult to destroy the stereotype because, at the level of the stereotype, rational-logical argumentation does not always work. Unsuccessful stereo- types should not be debunked, they must be supplanted by other – more pro- ductive stereotypes. The effectiveness of introducing stereotypes depends on the involvement of all five human senses: vision, hearing, smell, taste, and tactility. This guarantees rapid changes in the patterns of behaviour of the individual.

In political discourse, concepts of political image and political brand quite often are used as synonymous. However, there are significant differences between these concepts. The brand correlates with a certain ideal content. And the concept of image means the perception and evaluation of the brand by recipients.

It is argued that image characteristics act as peripheral features of the brand, giving it integrity in perception. Moreover, the formation of the image often comes down to the creation of a certain stereotype. Image characteristics can change, contributing to a more favourable positioning of the brand in certain conditions. Instead, a radical change in the brand itself (its identity) can lead to its destruction and disappearance.