It was an astonishing sight that first glimpse I caught of a dewy eyed David Cameron, lips pursed, staring pensively into the lens and deep to our souls. And beside this a (metaphoric) speech bubble with the rather desperate phrase "we can’t go on like this, I’ll cut the deficit not the NHS". Any PR guru worth their salt will tell you, it’s not a very sophisticated message.
The solemn face, the forlorn eyes, the negative and clunky use of words - even Daniel Finkelstein was forced to concede on Newsnight, earlier in the week, that the choice of words was not the best. Also on Newsnight was Peter Hyman, who said placing the words ‘NHS’ and ‘cuts’ within the same sentence is a bad idea, because anyone who catches a quick glimpse will put the words together and assume that’s what the line is, particularly because it's a Tory poster and they have form in this area.
It was an odd decision for the Tories to go with this message; presumably they had others and had focus grouped their messages. Their machine is so sophisticated, and I at least regard it to be rather slick, so why did they use such a defensive line as "I’ll cut the deficit, not the NHS"? It makes an assumption that everyone thinks this is what a Conservative government would do, thereby necessitating a pre-emptive rebuttal.
The poster should offer a ‘change message’ and reassurance, such as the infamous 1997 clincher "Things can Only get Better". That slogan pivoted into a positive message that created hope and aspiration for all those disillusioned with the then incumbent executive.
By last night, following the Hewitt/Hoon hoo-haa, the Conservative machine had come up with (what it considered to be) a tongue-in-cheek play on its own message with an image of Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt standing beside the line which read, ‘We Really Can’t go on Like This.’ But what this witty take on current events will achieve is limited - indeed there is a constituency of thought that believes this, along with Hoon/Hewitt gate, will give Brown a bounce, even if it’s a temporary one.
The point is that great propoganda doesn’t always achieve great results. Posters and TV are important, but you can attach disproportionate emphasis upon them. ‘Kinnock the Movie’, made for the 1987 election, was a groundbreaking film made with Lord Puttnam, but it didn’t achieve the result the party desperately needed.
In recent years the Conservative Party have not had a particularly good record with their posters, although the 1975 Saatchi and Saatchi campaign was a huge success, it must be said. The dole cue, the bleakness, the line: ‘Labour isn’t Working.’ That phrase worked because it was sophisticated and the message very simple. Their next effort in this mammoth campaign has to be far better, with a smarter message, than the current poster offers.
Sarah MacKinlay is director of Journalista, a political communications consultancy.
Photo, hat-tip Virtual Economics via Paul Waugh.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
"Vote Labour, you can trust us to tell the truth"
"Vote Labour, we've abandoned spin."
"Vote Labour, we already gave you Blair and Blears"
"Vote Labour, 5 more years of Brown and Mandelson"
Very good for OUR morale. The Tories loved their JedWard ones - it's only a bit of fun isn't it?
www.mydavidcameron.com
Labour has done some good, even if it hasn't done enough, in areas like more equality. The government clearly needs more of a big picture 'story' to tell voters, a 'narrative' of what Labour is about. Yes, like 1997's campaign.
I have a horrible feeling that the Labour posters might be as bad as the Tory ones.....
Isn't that the unique selling point? ;-)
clever on all fronts! LOL
Thanks .
Danny
Ps hope you ordered your t-shirt?
Proberly , It was sent just before christmas
Danny
I will check on it and make sure it is being worked on ;)
Thanks , I hope it can be sorted .
I think he might not of taken it seriously, My handwriting is like a rubbish(like the spelling) .
Danny
I am still not sure of the specifics (Alex can you email the problem Ricki has) because he is a very. very busy fella Ricki, he probably has a case worker dealing with it.
But if there is a problem I will deal with it, I have a way of getting things done which is not open to Mp's. But it is peaceful and completely legal ;) and within the "rules" they all love so much ;)
News ?
Hope you are feeling better?
Danny
Thanks ;)
I will be meeting Mr Cruddas soon and will be looking into your situation.
But you could class Cabnat minsters into that class , they have 2 jobs (cabnat post and mp) , then there is mr taylor (independent) who is a doctor, you are not suggesting that people can only be mps if the only have one job? would a doctor give up there job and leave there patients?
Just a question ? who is the chairman of celtec (or on the borad)?
Danny
So we are saying that vandlesiom is ok ? be cause ,first this should be condemed, Then , We should ask , do we belive some mps because they are rich or do we belive the ones that form our leadership? , In fact should we belive mPS ?
Danny
I have some news for you again ;)
Secondly, how do people respond to the fact that many Tory MPs have held and still hold multiple directorships? O.k., so Labour MPs have also cottoned on to this too, but it would seem to be a Tory precedent. The MP for my constituency (sorry, I just can't refer to him as my MP) has a really longstanding political career, a cabinet minister under Thatcher, but has indulged himself with several directorships, including in BAT which induced smoking by young people in Asia whilst knowing the dangers of tobacco smoking. We've now had the recommendations for MPs' expenses, when do we expect the report on directorships? When you consider that a directorship, I understand, might be upwards of £70k p.a., but an MP already has a full-time commitment as an MP, should we respect that MP? As I've posted elsewhere, I feel disenfranchised by this immovable object who dominates our constituency.
Cheers,
Dave
Would you mind if I did an MP interview to lift our spirits on Labourlist?
The technical term may be ostracized.
The right person, at the right place at the right time.
I'll have to check ;)
The Tories can't do a "things can only get better" type campaign because they won't - whoever wins.
A decade of runaway spending has condemned us and our children to years of crippling debt. And the worse is yet to come.
So the Tories have to be realistic and honest. Hence the number of policy ambitions rather than commitments. The Tories just can't promise that much.
However for a first poster the NHS one sets a good tone. Attracts attention and gets the two main messages across.
Remember this is just the first. £400,000 just to get the ball moving. Just wait until they open the cheque book proper.
And Labour? Well they seem to have run the parties finances on the same basis as the UK finances and as a result have next to zero money. If you want a good LL article its this that I would think is much more important.
This analytical approach in Media/PR is a very thorough one, but unfortunately reminds me of the least favourite phrase for me to read on a C.V.:
"I pay attention to detail."
No, the points were very good and not easy for someone like me outside the Industry to have picked on.
[PS: It's 'propaganda' not 'propoganda', by the way.]
'[PS: It's 'propaganda' not 'propoganda', by the way.]' And presumably, 'dole queue' rather than 'dole cue'.
Do you mind my asking, Shibley, why "I pay attention to detail" is your least favourite phrase on a CV?
You could knock me down with, say, a cricket bat.
Bill, what about a white feather!......ouch!.
Wouldn't it be better spent on treating patients and not lining your pockets?
Wasn't that 1979? And 'Demon Eyes' turned out to be spot-on!