Political communicators and their strategies

 Propaganda
 Public relations
 Political Marketing
 Political communicators
 Governments
Domestically and abroad

 Political parties
 Interest groups
 Non-governmental organizations
 Military
 Terrorists
 Autocratic regimes and communication

Absence of a public, public sphere, or public opinion

Subjects are assumed to be immature and politically inept, in need
of leadership and control
 "..a wise prince should establish himself on that which is his own control and not in that of others;
he must endeavour to avoid hatred, as is noted. [...] It is best to be both feared and loved;
however, if one cannot be both it is better to be feared than loved.“ (Machiavelli, Il Principe,
1513)

No modern regime can be based on pure violence and control

 “Most of what formerly could be done by violence and intimidation must now be done by
argument and persuasion.” (Laswell, Theory of Public Propaganda, 1927)

Most autocratic regimes employ ideologies to facilitate control

 And, according to Herman and Chomsky (Manufacturing Consent, 1988), so do democracies
 Ideological regimes are transformational and doctrinal, hence necessarily propagandist
 Propaganda
Derived from from the Latin verb propagare
'to reproduce (a plant) by cuttings; spread for sprouting; propagate; enlarge'.

[1622] Congregatio de Propaganda Fide

(“the congregation for propagating the faith”). Established by Pope Gregory XV in
order to centralize all of the Roman Catholic Church's missionary activity.

[1789] Increasingly secularized appropriation of the term during the

French revolution
[1842] political meaning overshadowing the religious, thereby
already taking on a derogatory connotation:
 "Derived from this celebrated society [for propagating the faith], the name propaganda is applied
in modern political language as a term of reproach to secret associations for the spread of
opinions and principles which are viewed by most governments with horror and aversion." (W.T.
Brande, Dictionary of Science, Literature, and Art)

[1922] First separate entry in Encyclopedia Britannica

Laswell’s theory of political propaganda
Deliberation
 “search for the solution of a besetting problem with no desire to prejudice a particular solution
in advance”

Propaganda
 ”the management of collective attitudes by the manipulation of significant symbols”
 “very much concerned about how a specific solution is to be evoked and ‘put over’”

Propaganda objective: to organize attitudes

 towards a person, a group, a policy, an institution, a mode of personal participation

Function of propaganda in modern life

 Attributable to social disorganization in the advent of technological changes
 “Most of what formerly could be done by violence and intimidation must now be done by
argument and persuasion.”
 Propaganda techniques

Institute of propaganda analysis (1937)

 Name-calling
 Glittering generality
 Euphemisms
 Transfer
 Testimonial
 Plain folks
 Bandwagon
 Propaganda by the deed
Three Italian anarchists (Errico Malatesta, Carlo Cafiero and
Emilio Covelli) conceived and developed the idea of
Propaganda by Deed through a series of letters to each other
between July and October 1876
 ‘By actions which compel general attention, the new idea seeps into people’s minds and wins
converts. One such act may, in a few days, make more propaganda than thousand pamphlets.
Above all, it awakens the spirit of revolt. . .’ (Kropotkin, Russian Anarchist)

Terrorism is symbolic violence

 “Violence aims at behaviour modification by coercion. Propaganda aims at the same by
persuasion. Terrorism can be seen as a combination of the two. Terrorism, by using violence
against one victim, seeks to coerce and persuade others. The immediate victim is merely
instrumental, the skin on a drum beaten to achieve a calculated impact on a wider audience.”
(Schmid, Frameworks for Conceptualizing Terrorism, 2004)
 ‘The success of a terrorist operation depends almost entirely on the amount of publicity it
receives’ (Walter Laqueur, Terrorism, 1977)
 Public relations
 ‘the management of communication between an organization and its publics’ (Grunig & Hunt,
Managing Public Relations, 1984)
 ‘using communication to adapt relationships between organizations and their publics’ (Botan,
International public relations, 1992)
 ‘historically, most PR has been weak propaganda’ (Moloney, Rethinking PR: The Spin and the
Substance, 2000)

Two myths of PR
Edward Bernays’ myth
 that public opinion could be manufactured for a price, bought and sold like any other
commodity
 Asymmetrical/functional approach
Ivy Lee’s myth
 that PR is natural, honorable and honest - part of the "two-way street" process of democratic
communications between businesses and their "publics"
 Symmetrical/ co-creational approach
 Quotes
 ‘We always tell our clients that honesty is the best policy. […] All our work is done in the
open. We aim to supply news. . . . Our plan is, frankly and openly, on behalf of business
concerns and public institutions, to supply the press and the public of the United States prompt
and accurate information concerning subjects which it is of value and interest to the public to
know about.’ (Ivy Lee, Statement of Principles, 1906)

 ‘If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind [it would be possible to]
control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it. . . . Theory
and practice have combined with sufficient success to permit us to know that in certain cases
we can effect some change in public opinion with a fair degree of accuracy by operating a
certain mechanism, just as the motorist can regulate the speed of his car by manipulating the
flow of gasoline.” (Edward Bernays, Propaganda, 1928)
 Public relations practice
Applications
 Crisis management
 Reputation management
 Issue management
 Investor relations and labour relations
 Grassroots PR (astroturf PR)

Tools
 Press conference
 Press releases
 Publicity events (stunts)
 The “circuit”
 Sponsorship

Objectives
 Credibility
 Publicity
 Political marketing
Empirical phenomenon
 Social change
 Electoral change
 Increasing importance of campaigns
 Professionalization of campaigns

Research paradigm
 Market models of politics
 Expansion of marketing to non-commercial applications
 Marketing model of party behaviour
 Social and electoral change

Social change
 Decreasing identifiability and relevance of social class
 Increasing social mobility
 Increased education
 Decreasing relevance of ideology
 Emergence of new issues/cleavages (Inglehart)

Electoral change
 Dealignment
 Increasing electoral volatility
 Decreasing explanatory power of variables like age, gender, class
 Decreasing importance of “projection”/issue alignment
 Issue voting; pocketbook voting; retrospective voting
 Increasing importance of campaigns

 Campaigns are no longer predominantly about mobilizing

support
 With decreasing base support, voters need to be attracted
through campaigning
 Campaign context impacts on economic, issue, leadership
evaluations
 More floating voters to compete over
 Increasing importance of mass media
 new findings challenging the “minimal effects model” providing campaigners
with reasons to trust in effectiveness of electioneering
 Professionalization of campaigns
 Exponential increases in campaign spending
 Use of consultants, pollsters, commercial advertisers
 Increasing influence of campaign consultants on policy content
of manifestos
 Policy convergence → need for distinguishing from competitors
 Market research (focus groups, private polling, direct-marketing,
database-marketing)
 Changing media focus, from coverage of issues, coverage of
leadership, image and the race, to coverage of strategy, party-
media interaction, and the role of spin
 Market models of politics
Schumpeter
 Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1947)
 “Elitist” model of democracy
 Function of voting: to restrain elites, not to manifest “common will”

Downs
 An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957)
 Rational choice model of voting
 Assuming material self-interest as primary motivation of elites and voters
 Median voter theorem: party platforms will converge, to accommodate voter preferences

Wellhofer
 “Contradictions in Market Models of Politics: the Case of Party Strategies and Voter Linkages'”,
European Journal of Political Research 1990
 Vote production
vs.
 Vote maximization
 Marketing model of party behaviour
 Three-stage development of modern business practice
applied to evolution of organizational behaviour of
political parties
 “Parties may simply stand for what they believe in, or focus on persuading voters to
agree with them, or change their behaviour to follow voters’ opinions” (Jennifer
Lees-Marshment, 2001: p. 701)

 Product-oriented party
 Sales-oriented party
 Market-oriented party
Product-oriented party
 Ideological
 Representing/leading social movement
 Unresponsive to social change
 Electoral success not an objective in itself
 Electoral goal: vote production/supporter mobilization

Sales-oriented party
 Ideological
 Intra-organizational choice of policies, leadership
 Using market research, advertising, communication techniques to sell itself, its
policies
 Electoral goal: persuasion

Market-oriented party
 Using market intelligence to identify voter demands
 Assessing deliverability of demanded policies
 Assessing intra-party acceptability of policy changes
 Designing product (party manifesto, leadership selection, etc) accordingly
 Electoral goal: adapting to the market
 Reconciling reputation with theory

Reputation
 Political marketing considered to be manipulative (spin doctors), dishonest, close
to propaganda, placing style over substance

Effect
 Political marketing practice appears to turn people off (decreasing turnout in US
since 1970s, collapse of turnout under New Labour since 1997)
 Public demand for politicians of conviction (but consider the paradox of
Margaret Thatcher – the pioneer of political marketing in UK, nonetheless
understood as principled and ideological)

Theory
 Positivistic, presenting political marketing as potentially regenerative force for
democracies (by basing policy on public preferences)