Valentine’s Day 2010.

What sweeter way for lovers to pass the evening than cuddled  together on the sofa in front of the TV watching Prime Minister Gordon Brown revealing how he proposed to his lovely wife Sarah?

The idea may be to win over not just the minds, but hearts of the UK electorate who, in just a matter of months, will be invited to fasten the fate of the country’s government – not with a SWALK, but ‘X’ factor style cross on ballot papers.

Feeling those vibes

Reports of the interview  sent vibrations – not all good – around the world.

Of particular concern to voters was the prospect of seeing their leader hold back tears as he discussed the tragic loss of his daughter and illness of his son.

In addition to being a highly personal and sensitive issue, by mixing personalities with policies, the Prime Minister is contradicting his frequently repeated views on the subject.

For example in 2008 he said:

“Some people have been asking why I haven’t served my children up for spreads in the papers – and my answer is simple:  My children aren’t props, they’re people.”

Last year (30 September 2009) in an interview on Sky News:

Brown:                                  I suggest we should be talking about policy issues – not     personality issues.

Interviewer:                        But personality does matter.

Brown:  (Irritated)            It does obsess you.

Brown's Got Talent?

The Brown branding strategy

Considering all this from a purely branding perspective, in addition to using the TV interview to showcase his own brand, Piers Morgan (the journalist who has been groomed by celebrity brand – alchemist, Simon Cowell) may have convinced the Prime Minister’s branding team to welcome the interview for key strategic reasons.

Emotional branding wins votes?

Any brand needs depth.  Such an interview offers voters a different view of Mr Brown.  That can help when it comes to making a final decision on the man and his policies during vote time.

Secondly, consumer brand messages often feature something called, ‘ESP’ – Emotional Selling Propositions.

For example, bread brands often highlight commercials with demographically appropriate families seated around the traditional kitchen table, sharing ‘quality time’ over a meal topped-off with a nice slice of nostalgia – in the shape of the said branded loaf.

Thirdly, last year, at its peak, a reality talent show featuring Morgan – Britain’s Got Talent – attracted 12.7 million viewers.

Significantly, that show was broadcast around May 2009 (the same possible month of this year’s general election).

Cue Coldplay track

During the interview, Morgan’s studio crew used many methods perfected by Simon Cowell to elicit an emotional response from viewers.  These included lingering shots of the Prime Minister’s wife as he spoke of his family’s tragic experiences.

For many, such crass ‘packaging’ of a Prime Minister may come across as contrived.

(Although there is no suggestion that the Brown’s personal losses are anything but dreadfully sad).

In Canada, one newspaper spoke of the PM being formerly remote and out of touch – with the TV interview offering a chance to come across as genuine to most voters.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

A brand leader needs a clear message

Any brand leader needs a clear and consistent message.  Not one, which is confused or diluted by anything weakening  its potency or is suspected to mimic for the sake of it, what a competitor, says or does.

Equally tragic, Brown’s main opponent, David Cameron, also suffered terrible loss in his family – and has spoken of it.

What would be galling for Brown, Cameron, as well as the electorate is, by also speaking of his loss, the PM comes across as playing some some vulgar tit for tat manoeuvre.

Brown’s problem is that as PM – the branded elected leader of the country – if he says nothing he is damned as aloof.

Revealing feelings he comes across as trying too hard to be empathetic and ‘one of the people’.

Quiet dignity

Breaking from tradition

Traditionally, politicians have kept their personal lives out of the media spotlight.

For example in 1963, Jackie Kennedy went into premature labour. She gave birth to a boy, via emergency Cesarean section.  The boy’s lungs were under-developed. He died.  Apart from a few official announcements, the tragedy was kept in the family.

However since the death of Princess Diana – who Tony Blair posthumously branded,  “The People’s Princess”, politicians have increasingly mixed personalities with politics.

In America it is a blood sport.

If Piers Morgan gets it right, the classic talent TV show format treatment of telling a ‘back-story’ full of pathos and lingering looks, will undoubtedly move some to vote for their guy at the Ballot Factor final.

On the other hand, for the deeply cynical, the release of the interview on the weekend that the UK took part in US-led Operation Moshtarak, meaning “together” in the Dari language – may be a brand ploy too far.  Especially as at least one UK fatality has already been announced.

Rather than sweet, the branding exercise may leave a very bitter and long lingering taste in hearts and minds.

Jonathan Gabay

www.brandforensics.co.uk

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to:

Recent relentless events virtually ensured that brands would start to question and even drop Tiger Woods from their marketing campaigns.

Tiger admitted that there was more to the incidents outside his home than he first admitted

A statement on his website said:

“I am deeply aware of the disappointment and hurt that my infidelity has caused to so many people, most of all my wife and children. I want to say again to everyone that I am profoundly sorry and that I ask forgiveness. It may not be possible to repair the damage I’ve done, but I want to do my best to try.”

“I would like to ask everyone, including my fans, the good people at my foundation, business partners, the PGA Tour, and my fellow competitors, for their understanding. What’s most important now is that my family has the time, privacy, and safe haven we will need for personal healing.”

“After much soul searching, I have decided to take an indefinite break from professional golf. I need to focus my attention on being a better husband, father, and person.”

And the walls began to crumble

Initially some of his  brand sponsors dramatically reduced their endorsements and appearance fees, which at their height in total were estimated to be around £65m a year.

Sports drink manufacturer Gatorade recently withdrew a product branded with his name.  However that decision was reportedly made long before the scandal broke.

Accenture, a global consulting firm once ran an advertisement with the headline: “To accomplish more. sometimes you have to see less.”  The company has now taken this to heart by becoming the first of Tiger’s sponsors to completely drop him from marketing campaigns.

Accenture released a statement saying it was ending its business agreement with Woods, who had represented the company for six years.

“After careful consideration and analysis, the company has determined that he is no longer the right representative for its advertising,”

With Tiger not actually playing for the foreseeable future, Accenture’s move is hardly surprising: Virtually all their Woods featured marketing depends on the player – playing golf.  No tournaments means no context to an advertising campaign.

What are you made of? (Tag Heuer Tiger Woods campaign slogan)

One day after Accenture’s dramatic announcement there are mixed reports whether Swiss watchmaker Tag Heuer which has been aligned with Tiger’s brand since 2002, will  maintain its association with Tiger.

“We will continue,”. “He’s the best in his domain. We respect his performance in the sport,” the company spokeswoman, Mariam Sylla, told the Associated Press. Woods’s personal life is “not our business”.

However Tag Heuer’s vice-president of communications stressed the company have not yet made an official decision over whether to continue their relationship with Woods and Francoise Bezzola told the Press Association: “We are not announcing that we will keep Tiger and we are not announcing we will drop Tiger Woods. We are still considering it and we haven’t taken a decision yet.”

Bezzola added that Tag Heuer is expected to make public their decision by the end of this week.

In Australia Tag Heuer has been reported to have  pulled down some poster advertisements featuring.

Perhaps the next in line to consider their agreement with ‘camp-Tiger’ may be the one sponsor best known for making Tiger so high profile in their advertising, Procter & Gamble Co’s, ‘Gillette’.  The brand recently announced it was reducing his part in its campaigns.

A reported statement said:

“As Tiger takes a break from the public eye, we will support his desire for privacy by limiting his role in our marketing programmes.”

Of all the sponsors, Gillette has the biggest public relations issue to consider by continuing using Tiger as a ‘pitch-man’. To begin with there is the queue of claimants who say they slept with Tiger (Including one who claimed that she and he had sex the night his father passed away).  Then there were the scenes car windows smashed by his wife with a golf-club… It just seems to go on and on…

For Gillette, the ethical issue must be particularly acute if only because in many cases, women often purchase razors for men.

Ninetendo Wii was banking on Tiger boosting Christmas sales of their ‘Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 09 All-Play’ videogame. At the very least, given the reports about his family life, this may become an awkward stocking filler to justify.

However, it is not all bad news for Tiger.   For now, sports goods giant Nike has decided to remain as loyal as a branded Nike cart-pushing caddy.

A spokesman said:

“Tiger has been part of Nike for more than a decade. “He is the best golfer in the world and one of the greatest athletes of his era. We look forward to his return to golf. He and his family have Nike’s full support.”

(The Associated Press reported that Nike’s golf business generates $650 million a year in revenue around Woods, so the timing of the scandal couldn’t be much worse).

Tiger’s withdrawal from golf would be one in the bunker for the sport in general. According to Nielsen Co the average television rating fell by nearly 50 per cent for a host of 2008 PGA tournaments that he missed whilst recovering from knee surgery.

Ewen Murray, the BSkyB golf commentator, said:

“He should stay away for a year. It will be a sad loss to the game, but I think he should write off 2010 and start again in 2011. I was as shocked as anyone when I heard what had been going on. Like everyone else I put him up there on a pedestal. I thought he was immaculate in shape and form. But he didn’t have a childhood.”

Tiger woods brand – where next?

The brand outlook

By not fully retracting their sponsorship, it seems that for now, many brands are actually hedging their bets – waiting to see how the public reacts next.

From a Brand Forensics view, Tiger is unlike many sports brand spokespeople.  His management team has spent years cultivating a ‘squeaky-clean’ image of the star and his family life. Other athletes have not necessarily made such claims.  It is for this reason, along with being labelled, ‘the billion dollar brand man’, that the story never seems to go away.

Peter Allis, English golfer, BBC television presenter and commentator said:

“He will be a figure of fun to comedians for years to come.”

Clearly to repair his personal brand, Tiger still has to take a very long walk on the road from perdition.

The spin doctors’ remedy: He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone (John 8:7)

Some spin-doctors argue that by publicly prioritising the rich blessings of his family and personal responsibilities before material fortunes, Tiger is broadcasting a contemporary message of a very ‘human’ man who, like so many others, is fallible – rather than an over- hyped hero.

As such a ‘normal’ man, who is more than the outward sum of his material wealth, Tiger has the opportunity to make good a truly dreadful mess for the people who really matter – his family and real friends.

The spin would be that by bravely doing so in the harsh glare of publicity he is indirectly also acting on behalf of many other men who wish that they too could make amends.

Following this logic, such a spin antidote could even turn out to mean that in the mid to longer term, he emerges as an even more powerful brand hero of the common people – one with more dimensions and so character than a ‘squeaky-clean’ corporately sanitised and so unrealistic and so little to emphasise with icon.

I am not so sure that the remedy would be 100% accepted by today’s more enlightened society. An apology shouldn’t condone any alleged miss-doings.  Indeed, if true, the accusations do nothing but show an appalling disrespect for women, children of broken homes and by association, the otherwise innocent men who play the noble game of golf.  (Hardly the appropriate message from a man marketed as the voice and face as well as role model for his profession).

However, today’s society also takes a more lenient approach to occasionally making what some may view as understandable slips. So sincere action– rather than staged platitudes and empty promises tend to earns respect from many sectors.

One possible move for Tiger’s team would be to encourage his wife to publicly state that she will only allow him to play golf on the condition that he sorts out his game off the course.

Arguably that would be a point score for feminism.

However in my opinion it would still implicitly sanction Tiger’s alleged actions and so send the wrong message to children, wives, families and broader society about what should rather than may constitute acceptable behaviour as espoused by brands.  This is a particularly important issue for many major American brands known to be particularly conservative about their public image.

Yet, timed right and managed correctly this Tiger may still have more than just a purr left in him.

Whichever way Tiger goes next, he will certainly have a lot to think about this holiday season whilst walking around the course after his family meal – attended – or not, by the really important people who should admire him at this time of year.

www.brandforensics.co.uk

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to:

MP expenses - can the public ever trust their branded champions again?

Today, sweeping reforms are being announced concerning MP expenses. The restructure follows Sir Christopher Kelly’s heavily leaked report which set out the suggested proposals. The House of Commons speaker will urge members of parliament to accept the main thrust of Sir Christopher’s recommendations.

Recommendations include:

Banning MPs from using their second home allowance to pay for a mortgage. Instead they will have to rent or use hotels with a budget of up to £1250 per month.

A ban on claiming second home allowances for members who live within an hour’s train journey to the Palace of Westminster.

Limits on first class rail travel.

A cut on the amount of money MPs receive should they lose their seat. (Reportedly this “golden goodbye “currently ranges from £32,383 to £64,766, depending on age and time served. The first £30,000 is tax free).

Sir Christopher’s report will recommend to replace this with a small fixed sum, possibly a couple of months’ salary.

The £10,400-a-year communications allowance – the only allowance voted through by MPs without a recommendation from the senior salaries review board – is expected to be removed.

Repositioning MPs’ brand

From a branding public relations perspective, the big question is, “will the newly announced reforms be enough to swing votes and win back respect”?

That depends on whether the MPS follow the classic ‘AAA’ personal rebranding formula for fallen leaders:

Authentic
They must come across as authentic – both in policies and actions.  It won’t be enough to simply say they were just following rules. As the makers and influencers of nationally and internationally significant policies, they must be seen to go over and above what is expected of them.

Part of this legitimacy is be authentic even – and arguably – especially about the small details which help determine their perceived character – such as buying bathroom plugs.  (In branding, it is the small details that people remember before the big ones).

Accountable

Over the past months, commentators have noted that despite massive public opinion rallying against them, some MPs continued to act indignantly against constituent criticism of their behaviour.  Such MPs fell victims to a classic psychological trait: ‘sticking their heads in the sand’.  They simply reassured themselves that the whole situation would  ‘blow away’.

The more they fixated on that, the greater the problem swelled.  They should have accepted their failings and made amends – publicly. When the community sees a public figure from an MP to a TV celebrity, owning up to something and positively making amends, they tend to become more tolerant of that person.

The lesson here is one that just about every child learns at primary school: Before running the risk of doing something wrong, consider if you are prepared to have your choice of actions exposed to the people you care for and (in the case of a child) love.”

Another part of that accountability reposition was to get an independent body to reassess the rules.  This has been achieved.  However, the new system can only become law once the newly created Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA), following yet another period of consultation, adopts it and not until after the next election.  (This prevaricating may leave a bad taste in the electorate’s mouths).

Accessible.

Anyone can use the Freedom of Information act to uncover truths. The more such truths are swept under the carpet covering over public opinion, the more obvious the propaganda becomes. Public, personal acceptance of responsibility helps to restore trustworthiness.  Therefore the MPs’ business affairs need to become even more transparent than ever.

One way to tackle this is for the MPs to take responsible control of social media – not a gimmick – but genuinely open channel that allows and encourages the public to question and hear for themselves what their elected representatives are up to.

For example, the US White House recently launched a website called, ‘Recovery.gov’ which provides trouble-free access to data related to Recovery Act spending and allows for the reporting of potential fraud, waste, and abuse.

Finally MPs need to understand that they are not just leaders of the public but public leaders – and their public expects  that their selected few set examples for the collective whole.

Jonathan Gabay
www.brandforensics.co.uk

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to:

Four hours before BNP leader Nick Griffin appeared on BBC’s Question Time I was standing in a room within Leicester’s impressive Curve building, delivering a talk based on my latest book, ‘Soul Traders’.

The audience comprised of marketers curious to learn about the darker side of marketing – in other words, propaganda and the history of hype and spin.  Most of all, they wanted to understand what could be learnt from past mistakes to build better futures.

Aware of the imminent British National Party broadcast, during the talk I warned the audience that, based on BNP’s insidious attempts to rewrite history by miss-representing the significance of the World War II Spitfire and intent of Winston Churchill, there was every likelihood that Griffin would hijack the iconic poppy badge symbol as a way to demonstrate his racist party’s allegiance to the men and women who defended the British against foreign enemies.

After all, what with all the hype around the Question Time broadcast, and lucky timing of Poppy day being just a few weeks away, from a spin and propaganda point of view, this was one opportunity that Griffin and his cohorts would surely not want to miss.

However, I over-estimated how Griffin would position the odious BNP brand.  I had assumed that in addition to ‘number-one’ haircut bodyguards, nowadays he would be surrounded by slick spin-doctors.

From a ‘Soul Traders’ point of view he could have called upon classic propaganda arguments and approaches that have been adopted for many years by extremists and especially dicatorships.  (The 28 most used arguments are featured and exposed in full in the Soul Traders book itself – see www.soultraderstruth.com).

At the very least, I expected Griffin’s PR advisers to encourage him to spin this week’s news regarding UK’s heaving over-population which is expected to swell to over seventy million  - thanks in no small part to immigration.

Ignoring recent reports in the Guardian that suggest half of the recent Polish immigrants have already gone home, surely his advisors would have advised him to look solemnly at the camera as he slipped in something along the lines of, “The facts – not the racist rhetoric – are that Great Britain, an island, is only so big and can accommodate only so many…“ etc…

If he would have plucked that line he may have won the attention of the openly quiet middle-classes who are publicly ‘PC’ and do business with anyone of any creed or colour, yet privately deeply despair at the lightening-fast demographic shifts affecting the UK, rationalising their feelings not on race but the real perceived threat of being overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of people having to be accommodated and supported by the country.

Incredibly his spin-doctors didn’t even draw capital from the very long held British tradition that  ”an Englishman’s home is his castle”.  By doing so he could have played the immigration card to its full potential – pointing to overcrowding  encroaching on the sacred grounds of such middle-class ‘ two-up, two-down castles’.

Or he could have appealed to the poor and recession crunched classes, pointing to local jobs going to foreign workers – putting forward a ‘considered argument’, rather than reckless racist rant addressing an all too real and practical issue that the other parties were failing to fully and properly address.

Pointing to sovereignty rather than preaching hegemony, he could have even tried to win over swing voters from the UK Independence Party – making his brand appear even more legitimate.

However, Griffin botched it up yet again by failing to read his own Ministry of Truth guidelines.  This firebrand dragon was coming across as just a lot of hot air. He was clearly neither an accomplished politician nor even a B- grade graduate from the ‘blitzkrieg school of would-be propagandist dictators’.  Instead he chose to insult the intelligence of precisely the potential swing voters that he needed.

Anti-war protesters deface poppy poster for political gain

Repeat after me – “I must repeat”

Two of the basic tenets of getting your propaganda message across is firstly take the advice of one of the people that Griffin undoubtedly admires – Goebbels.  He said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”   In other words, keep it simple and keep saying it.  Secondly to always have a kernel of truth or logic in your policies.  However, rather than sticking to his spurious argument about the importance of being 100% British, he compared the Brits to Maoris – presumably just the sort of people that Griffin’s intended swing voters would definitely prefer not to be likened to.

To clarify his definition of who exactly fitted the bill as being authentically ‘British’ he explained that such a person’s descendents would have remained within the British Isles for literally thousands of years. (At one point, 17,000 years was mentioned).  Bad move Griffin – how could even the most eager swing voter qualify for that?

Griffin also claimed that any gay or lesbian was ‘creepy’ – yet another vote seeking mistake as studies in the last few months suggest that even on a mild note, one in four ‘straight people’ in the UK would be more than happy to confide in a gay best friend.  Moreover civil partnerships are becoming very much the norm. (Although he did manage to score some points with certain people by suggesting that sex education should not be taught in class to the very young and then pointing to his albeit totally misunderstood understanding of Islamic traditions, suggesting that certain Islamic sects treat women as second-class citizens and  following up with a warning against Shahriar law coming to the UK – that  line won a ripple of applause with the audience).

However he then yet again lost his credibility  with the audience by going from plausible arguments to extreme  suggestions such as that the Klu Klux Klan were essentially a friendly and passive lot.

Finally he insulted even the most shallowly educated voter by suggesting that the only evidence of the holocaust during the second world war was based on a spurious radio intercepted message that suggested the numbers of dead were millions short of the reported six million souls. This from the man who in 1997 published a booklet entitled ‘Who are the Mind Benders?’ which outlined a Jewish conspiracy to brainwash the British people in their own “homeland”. (In 1988 Griffin told a court that despite orthodox opinion that six million Jews were gassed, in fact… “orthodox opinion also once held that the Earth is flat”).  Indeed, speaking of annihilation, according the Griffin, the incumbent Labour party was apparently conducting genocide as he spoke throughout the UK.

The other panellists

Equally his fellow panellists missed out on their own party-line chances.  Whilst their arguments were sound and insightful, they insisted on immediately shouting down any possible retort from Griffin to their opinions.  Through doing so they prevented Griffin from publicly exposing even deeper holes in his claims.  Constant out-bursts suppressing Griffin – however well meaning – potentially left the casual TV viewer who may not have been that enamoured anyway with current politics, with the feeling of witnessing a biased shouting match.

Talking over Griffin, allowed him to offer the press countless picture and video clip opportunities of a forlorn – vilified as the “most misunderstood man in the country”.  To his propagandist credit, he seized the moment, painting the image of a courageous chap who, whilst being publicly silenced and humiliated, in reality simply wanted to ‘reform’ his party from being neo-Nazi thugs to open minded patriots. (Glossing over the facts that firstly Griffin was convicted in 1998 of inciting racial hatred for articles that praised the Waffen-SS, and secondly in terms of being silenced, in Britain, holocaust denial is not illegal).  He went on to say his party supported Israel during the recent Gaza conflict.  (Although I am not convinced that Israel really needs the support of a holocaust denier, fund raiser with Libya and platform sharer with Abu Hamsa).

The longer threat and lasting perceptions

The morning following the broadcast I was lecturing in a small traditional Labour voter town near Derby called Alfreton.  The town had been affected particularly badly by the recession. Factories were closed and new immigrants had taken remaining local jobs at reduced wages.  For the first time, the long-held Labour ward that had even survived the 1970s closures of mines and subsequent feuds between families, fell to the Tories.  If anywhere was ripe for swing-voter pickings, this place was it.

I asked some people if they had seen last night’s Question Time?   They hadn’t but had heard from others in town that Griffin was continuously ‘shouted-down’ by the other parties.  “It was just the same old party politics – everyone at each other’s necks and no-one listening to the ordinary people.”

Similar reported stories from other parts of the country started to emerge.  From Dagenham, East London, the BBC reported that even those who did not share his political views felt he had been victimized

“I felt sorry for the guy really,” said Bill, 64, an out-of-work electrician, who said he had never voted for the BNP. “The trouble with this country is they don’t like the truth. If you don’t join the club and say what you think is right you are a bad influence They were just after slaughtering him. He was just maybe not educated enough to take on that many people…. “ [Actually he was educated in Cambridge] ….  “He did show Jack Straw up a bit though.”

A 42 year old NHS health worker commented, “He has a right to display his position.”

All this was followed up by a YouGov opinion poll taken hours after the programme that said, more than a fifth of voters would consider backing the British National Party in a future election.

Some 22% of those questioned said they would “seriously consider” voting BNP in a local, European or general election – including 4% who said they would “definitely” consider backing the party, 3% who would “probably” consider it, and 15% who said they were “possible” BNP voters.

A News of the World’s ICM poll of 504 adults on October 23 and 24, 2009 across the country revealed that when it came to immigration issues, 54 per cent of UK voters said there were too many immigrants in the country, 44 per cent said the white working class had been abandoned by the mainstream parties and 65 per cent believed foreign arrivals received favourable treatment on housing and other benefits.

A notable one third of voters supported the BNP policy that people from ethnic minorities should lose all state benefits, including NHS treatment.  Little over one in 20 people, thought that the BNP had the right policies to sort out the problem Twenty six per cent said the Tories had the best immigration policy and 21 per cent backed Labour.

However only 10 per cent said there should be a stop on all future immigration.

The BBC announced that this probably would not be the last time that Griffin would be invited to speak on TV.

Just as fields of poppies grow on the wastelands of war and the fallen, propaganda flourishes on hearsay, and these days not just sound bites alone, but video-blips, blogs, tweets and especially framed looks and expressions caught in a moment and sometimes interpreted out of sequence and context.

Far too often in history, hearsay somehow transforms into reported fact. Underlying, unaddressed fears get ignored and brushed under the carpet so often that eventually such anxieties become tumours demanding attention.  Once that happens, even the dourest gryphon can spread his wings on a flight of fancy – however ludicrously fanciful such a flight may have at first appeared on telly.

Jonathan Gabay

www.brandforensics.co.uk

www.soultraderstruth.com

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to:

As Cameron, Brown and Clegg spin out more and more explanations and excuses over MP expenses or ‘allowances’, the race is on to see who will perform the most convincing crisis-management of the greatest example of parliamentary Soul Trader shenanigans in modern times.

Discussing the MPs’ monopoly over tax-payer- financed perks, Nick Clegg believes “The only long term solution to this problem is to take MPs out of the property investment game altogether.” Brown has set a deadline of Monday for his ministers to lodge their expense claims for the past five years ” with the parliamentary authorities and ready for publication”. He has also appealed directly to the broader electorate speaking their language – rather than that of political double talk, saying in the News of the World that: “The bottom line is that any MP who is found to have defied the rules will not be serving in my government. The action must be swift and comprehensive” Moreover he has made decisive moves on his MPs, for example suspending, pending an enquiry, David Chaytor who claimed 13,000 pounds of taxpayers’ money for a mortgage which he had already paid off.

In terms of actions rather than promises, at this moment at least Brown’s propaganda expertise is getting closer to of Cameron who warned that Tory MPs who made extravagant everyday expenditure claims could be ordered to repay expenses or lose their party whip.

For an MP – or anyone with power – a direct threat to be destabilised from a person even higher than them will hurt. The higher their career position, the further distant they become from ordinary people at ‘ground level’. This could be one reason why so many MPs initially didn’t accept the errors of their ways, assuming that their rank, cushioned by their offices, would help cover things from those much lower than them in the pecking order – namely the electorate who voted them in. Coming down to earth would, for many, feel like a direct affront to their roles as successful people.

Current spin techniques tumbling out of the ‘House of Comics’ are not new. In addition to listing top twenty-eight ways to spin any story, Soul Traders tells the remarkable story of lies and propaganda as practiced over hundreds of years by institutions, business and politicians alike and perfected not just by the current incompetents in Westminster but manipulative leaders in both business and cultural circles.

Six of the best
Spot the spin – adapted from ‘The 28 Ways’ – Chapter 12 of Soul Traders

1. It wasn’t me – it was him – honest
Stain your advisory’s character rather than addressing their argument. This is probably one of the most common political tactics.

Liberal ministers smear Tory ministers, Labour smear Liberals and all are watched in hi-def absurdity on an £8,865 TV paid by taxpayers and owned by former Labour environment minister Sir Gerald Kaufman.

2. At all times, keep a stiff upper lip
Reassure those steadfast to your party that loyalty to the party, however tough, is the ethical as well as logical course of action. Indeed, the chastising act of enduring testing times or rules such as Cameron’s Whip decree, builds personal character. (This technique of making people feel they have to comply or quit the ‘inner circle’ is often used in religions or cults).
3. Call in the man with the braces and glasses
Secure and exploit the voluntary or sponsored endorsement of a respected expert, politician or celebrity. In the case of MP expenses, that expert is Sir Christopher Kelly. As part of a rather mealy-mouthed interim effort whilst waiting on the ‘bloke with the braces’ findings, Harriet Harman asked the cross-party Members’ Allowances Committee, chaired by Labour MP Don Touhig, to draw up proposals. Incredibly, their proposals must be approved by another group of MPs – the Members’ Estimates Committee, chaired by none other than Labour Speaker Michael Martin.

4 Repeat something with conviction– over and over again.
Cunning politicians exploit what psychologists have long known: thanks to the neurophysiology of the learning process, simple repetitive association between two concepts can make false propositions ‘feel’ true. Often trite, usually direct statements, which are repeated often enough, appear true.

Past masters of this are our ‘special relationship friends’ in the USA. “There can be no whitewash in the Whitehouse”…. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”… “Healthy Forests Initiative”. (Allows clear cutting in federal land). “Clean Water” proposal. (Exempts Clean Water Act protection of 70% of US streams). It’s the economy, stupid” Not forgetting our own Great British examples: “Education, education, education.”

It will be interesting to see what Brown or Cameron come up with…

5. The Green Book says ‘Yes’ (Reductio ad Hitlerum)
This technique states that if an evil or undesirable faction supports, uses or performs something in particular, then that object or concept must be bad. In the case of MPs the ‘evil’ is the Green Book – not the MPs. The only trouble with their argument is that they wrote the Green Book!

In wider society if hoodlums carry penknives, all penknives are automatically reclassified as weapons rather than tools. In spin this can be useful, as culpability gets shifted from the villain to the object (in this case, knives). This creates the opportunity for lots of political spin in news stories about knives, which of course in the long term are irrelevant, as the real problem isn’t knives but the way they are misused.

6 The little red herring and big elephant in the room
The first technique mastered by magicians is sleight of hand and distraction. Peter Mandelson accused the Daily Telegraph of misusing leaked details about the Cabinet’s personal expenses claims to “inflict damage on the government and Labour politicians by creating the perception, but not the fact, on the evidence of wrongdoing”

In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Coalition said that there was evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein had the capability to launch weapons of mass destruction that could reach Britain within 45 minutes. Despite all the subsequent reports and research, no hard evidence was ever proven.

Similar to the Red Herring technique is “card stacking.” Audience perception of an issue is manipulated by creating media events focusing on a particular view emphasizing one thing whilst repressing another. (For example, Hazel Blears brandished a poster in front of the world’s press of a cheque made out for £13,332 in capital gains tax that she had avoided when selling one of her homes.

In terms of the elephant, put forward a huge claim – so big, it has to be true – (Yet no one actually sees the tangible evidence for themselves). Persistency pays off; eventually your audience believes your account. Continue to discuss the elephant and its presence –despite any proof that it is actually there. The only steadfast rule to follow is that your story must contain a grain of truth that’s just credible enough to make your account plausible.

For example: Iraq could deploy biological weapons within 45 minutes – need I say more?
Jonathan Gabay
http://www.brandforensics.co.uk
http://www.soultraderstruth.com

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to:

Everyone is talking about the MP expense scandal.

Claim: The prime minister paid his brother, £6,577 for arranging cleaning services for his Westminster flat for 26 months.

Spin: The two shared a cleaner who worked in both their flats. His brother paid her and was reimbursed for his share of the cost. He did not do the cleaning himself or gain financially.

Claim: Jack Straw over-claimed £1,500 on council tax on his second home. He made a claim for the full bill despite getting a 50% discount from the local authority for the property.

Spin: Mr Straw acted within the rules. He spotted the mistaken council tax claim himself and repaid the money himself.

Claim: Keith Vaz, claimed more than £75,000 to fund a second home in Westminster, despite his family home being just 12 miles away in Stanmore.

Spin: Mr Vaz: “It’s on junction 4 of the M1 and I keep the Westminster flat for early morning meetings as do many MPs who live in that block” 

Such claims are just another example of spin from ‘Soul Traders’.  In my book, which examines the history of propaganda and hype, I list  twenty-eight classic techniques that flatter, cajole, create paranoia, generate distrust, affirm half-truths, and provoke the public to believing what is needed in order to build trust.

Here are just seven – recognise them? 

The Seven Deadly Spins

1  Ad hominem

Smear your advisory’s character rather than addressing their argument. This is probably one of the most common tactics used in politics.  

         Cameron smears PM for getting the tax-payer to finance his    home improvements whilst Cameron back-peddles on his own  Shadow-Cabinet’s expenses.

2  A- B choice

Offer two choices with your cause or a brand being positioned as the better of the two. “You are either for us or against us.”  You’re either a ‘brand-x’ user or a nobody.”

         From the invasion of Iraq to the rights of Ghurkhas and admirers of Marmite – There is no middle ground.

3  Repetition

Repeat your message time after time via a controlled use of the media.

          For example using a political motto or advertising jingle.     Watch  the advert enough times and even if it is annoying, it still gets under your hitherto ‘resilient’ consumer skin.  Or the current Swine Flu campaign ” Catch it. Bin it. Kill it.”

4  Highlight self-interests

Incorporate emotive terms highlighting ethical fairness… Or point to the selfishness of second party’s interests over that of the greater good.         

For example, “any honest person wouldn’t dream of downloading   illegal movies off the web.”  Or, The Co-Op Bank –“good with  money”. Or L’Oreal ” Because I’m worth it.”

5  Expert blessing
Secure and exploit the voluntary or sponsored endorsement of a respected expert, politician or celebrity.  ‘If it is good enough for the experts who independently understand the implications of the cause, it must be good enough for everyone’.

         For example, using David Beckham or Lewis Hamilton endorsing   brands.

6  Be one of the in-crowd

Make people believe their loyalty proves that they are trendsetters rather than followers.  

         In marketing, this works well with brands appealing to youth  such as Reebox sneakers or Apple iPods.  Another  classic example is an advert published by Burger King against McDonalds reading: “Would you rather feast like a king or eat like a clown?”

7  Big Lie

Despite any contrary hearsay from groups (strategically positioned as ‘subversive’), continually repeat your version of a set of events until the audience begins to believe your account. Continue to do so,  even if on close examination your story can’t be fully substantiated.  The only steadfast rule to follow is that your story must contain a grain of truth that’s just credible enough to make your account plausible.

            For example:  Iraq could deploy biological weapons within 45 minutes –     need I say more?

And just one more … Red Herring:

Monday 11^th May 2009 “I want my party to be the party of change and reform:, David Cameron – who claims the mortgage interest on his home.

Distract an audience and the rest is easy. Spin-doctors are well aware of the technique. Similar to the Red Herring technique is “Card Stacking.”  Audience perception of an issue is manipulated by emphasizing one thing whilst ignoring another, such as Cameron’s statement:  “The system we had and used was wrong…

A complete list of classic spin techniques are detailed in Soul Traders  a hard-hitting analysis of the impact of propaganda and spin on popular culture – from the way Hezbolah uses the web as a recruitment tool, to branding ploys, recession double-speak and the rise of a celebrity hegemony.  

Check out www.soultraderstruth.com

Share on Facebook

Bookmark to: