Interview: Borka Tomić, PR manager of Serbian Institute for Public Diplomacy in Brussels

Re-branding Serbia

The image of the state is very important, in foreign politics but also for its citizens. What kind of image does Serbia have in the world at this moment and how can we make it better?


By JASNA JANKOVIĆ
from Belgrade, SERBIA


The Serbian Institute for public diplomacy in Brussels is a non-governmental organization founded in 2005 in order to promote Serbia and its interests and to represent the "Euro - Serbian" brand. The image of the state is very important in foreign politics but also for the citizens. Regarding the image of Serbia today and the ways to improve it, "WAVE" magazine talked to Borka Tomić, the PR manager of the Institute.

One of the most frequent subjects lately is branding Serbia. Why is it so important?

- In order to represent Serbia in the best possible way we have to determine its identity and for what it should be recognized by our public and abroad. Branding a state contains four parts - public affairs, economy, business (within these two is the representation of foreign investments and export), and tourism. A very important segment is culture, which is considered to be a part of export, although in our country isn't yet seen in that way. Forming the image of the state isn't important just on the state level but also for every citizen. It means a lot when you can get out of your country and be proud of where you are coming from. I'm sure older people will remember how it was in the `70s and `80s. The Institute and myself are trying to represent our country in that way, or to do re-branding of Serbia. People abroad should know that Serbia is not just Mladić, The Hague and war, but something totally different.

Once you said that 8 news - out of 10 - published about Serbia in the foreign media are negative. Has something changed recently?

- No, it hasn't. It's a very similar situation. I've been monitoring the foreign news for about a year and once a month, or maximum two or three times, some good news from Serbia shows up. But it's all minimal and somehow just passes by. The bad news is now good news. And that isn't the case just with our country. Some news from Iraq will be published sooner than good news from Serbia. About the positive news, we should mention that the "New York Times" had their reporter Seth Sherwood write an article, "Belgrade rocks", and it caused great interest. Then "New York Times" gave the authors rights to the "International Herald Tribune" and that article was a big hit. Seth himself told me that article has been published in a couple of others newspapers. I'm sure there are people interested in the positive image of Serbia.

Croatia, as you said, realized a lot sooner the importance of being represented in the international community. How late are we compared to them?

- We are being late for seven, eight years since they started to work on their image. That doesn't mean that we'll need that number of years to catch up with them, but that we'll have to put in a lot of work and will power to find out the necessary strategy, the tactics and to do what they did. They've found a central idea in the whole story and it wasn't hard considering the fantastic coast lines they have. We should do something like that. Someone will think this is silly, but I don't - one bombed building somewhere in Belgrade or Serbia should be turned into an embassy of youth. We should make an action for young architects around the world - what can we make out of that kind of building. And as we look how that building grows, we'll grow like that in our own eyes and in the eyes of the international community. That shouldn't be the bank or the hotel tomorrow, it should symbolize something that we learned from that tragic lesson.

What else could be the brand of Serbia?

- Regarding people - Emir Kusturica, especially in the francophone part of Europe - France, Belgium. Vlade Divac, for example, in the USA. Regarding products, it could be raspberries, they just go out of Serbia, but no one knows where they came from. Then there is natural, organic food and juices. The question of the traditional Serbian products was brought up in Brussels and the people in the EU allowed a list of traditional products that could be exported without bacteriological certification. That was done because some products like "kajmak" would never get that certification.

What actions of the Institute were the most effective in the field of re-branding Serbia?

- To get back to our identity, it was necessary to find out what foreigners are thinking about our country, what's their first impression and does it change after some information they get. I held a couple of lectures in Paris - about re - branding Serbia. In that way I learned a lot from the students about what could Serbia present to the world. Then, I held a lecture at the Collage of Europe in Bruges. I was also guest in Wiesbaden at the invitation of a Serbian cultural club. But all initiatives like that take time. Our current image in the world is not unchangeable and we could build international brands. We have local and national brands and through interactions with foreigners we can complete our presentation.

There are some opinions that brands shouldn't be made, but allowed to be formed spontaneously?

- I think that the truth is somewhere in the middle. Of course, the market is going to decide wether something will become a brand or not, but we could prepare the product so that the market accepts it.

Recently, a tender was created for advising on building a strategy of branding Serbia. Do you think that's a good move?

- Any initiative is positive. There are a lot of things that we have to work on and keep in mind when it comes to branding. And I think we should start this moment. Mladić, The Hague, the elections or any other thing mustn't be an excuse for not working on branding. But that tender isn't finished. It stopped. For decision-makers, something else is more important.

Does it mean that there is still a lack of will in the government to cooperate with you?

- Well, simply other things are more important to them. They still didn't realize that group of people should be working on our image every day. For now, there are some offices that take care of the image. In government there is a media relations Office, but that is on a political level. There is a similar office in the Ministry of foreign affairs. We don't have any office that works on a global level, and that is a problem. People should work together.

Some experts claim that the change of image won't mean anything if we don't improve our political, economic situation, that foreign investors won't invest?

- I have a concrete example of Croatia. They have problems, but they talk about everything that's positive before, during and after it. They have a very good PR strategy for everything. In our country it's a different story and we should follow the ones that are working hard. The Croatian economy in this moment is in a far worse shape than Serbian, but I can't see that reflecting on global level. Foreign investors have first to hear about our country in order to invest in it. They need to hear about the economical indicators that are really positive. It's not our words, but the words of people in the EU who are very satisfied with the reforms achieved on the economical level. If we want to interest investors we have to separate political situation, which in the end does not affect the investors here.

What was the most unusual reaction you heard regarding Serbia?

- It was the comment of my professor of communication theory on my master studies in Paris. I asked how could we make influence on people who are watching Spanish soap operas, cheap productions like "Grand". And he said: "Why would you want to change that? It's better for your people to look at that then to be at war." I was really annoyed. And I worked a lot to change that image.