POLITICAL
COMMUNICATION
“In
the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our
friends… “ Martin
Luther King, Jr.
Political
communication(s) is a subfield of communication and political science that is
concerned with how information spreads and influences politics and policy
makers, the news media and citizens. Since the advent of the World Wide Web,
the amount of data to analyze has exploded, and researchers are shifting to
computational methods to study the dynamics of political communication. In
recent years, machine learning, natural language processing, and network
analysis have become key tools in the subfield. It deals with the production,
dissemination, procession and effects of information, both through mass media
and interpersonally, within a political context. This includes the study of the
media, the analysis of speeches by politicians and those that are trying to
influence the political process, and formal and informal conversations among
members of the public, among other aspects. The media acts as bridge between
government and public. Political communication can be defined as the connection
concerning politics and citizens and the interaction modes that connect these
groups to each other. Whether the relationship is formed by the modes of
persuasion, Pathos, Ethos or Logos.
The study and
practice of political communication focuses on the ways and means of expression
of a political nature. Robert E. Denton and Gary C. Woodward, two important
contributors to the field, in Political Communication in America characterize
it as the ways and intentions of message senders to influence the political
environment. This includes public discussion (e.g. political speeches, news
media coverage, and ordinary citizens' talk) that considers who has authority
to sanction, the allocation of public resources, who has authority to make
decision, as well as social meaning like what makes someone American. In their
words "the crucial factor that makes communication 'political' is not the
source of a message, but its content and purpose.".
Swanson and Dan
Nimmo, also key members of this sub-discipline, define political communication
as "the strategic use of communication to influence public knowledge,
beliefs, and action on political matters." They emphasize the strategic nature of
political communication, highlighting the role of persuasion in political
discourse. Brian McNair provides a similar definition when he writes that
political communication is "purposeful communication about politics."
For McNair this means that this not only covers verbal or written statements,
but also visual representations such as dress, make-up, hairstyle or logo
design. With other words, it also includes all those aspects that develop a
"political identity" or "image". Reflecting on the
relationship between political communication and contemporary agenda-building,
Vian Bakir defines Strategic Political Communication (SPC) as comprising
'political communication that is manipulative in intent, that utilises social
scientific techniques and heuristic devices to understand human motivation,
human behavior and the media environment, to inform effectively what should be
communicated – encompassing its detail and overall direction – and what should
be withheld, with the aim of taking into account and influencing public
opinion, and creating strategic alliances and an enabling environment for
government policies – both at home and abroad'.
There are many
academic departments and schools around the world that specialize in political
communication. These programs are housed in programs of communication,
journalism and political science, among others. The study of political
communication is clearly interdisciplinary.
Rulers and governed
have always had the need to relate to each other. The first because they need
the support of citizens to develop their political ideas and make them
tangible, the latter because they want to let their politicians know what
society needs and what they expect from them. In this sense, the message
transmitted by these political actors is what legitimizes them or not as such,
hence the importance of Political Communication.
"The
Prince" by Machiavelli, written at the beginning of the 16th century, was
one of the first treatises on political theory in History in which its author
describes the way in which a ruler must make use of his power. Machiavelli
points out that politics is an artificial matter created by human talent and
comes to justify the existence of autocratic leaders in their ability to
understand the game of political power.
Already in the
eighteenth century, Louis XVI of France became one of the precursors of the
image of the politician, and later Napoleon showed his interest in controlling
the opinion of the masses with the creation of an office of Public Opinion.
This institution is another example of how politicians have used the
instruments available to them in their time to transmit their messages in a successful
manner.
However, it is from
the second half of the twentieth century when the Political Communication is
professionalized. In the 1920s the concept of propaganda appeared with the
so-called Creel committee that, under the control of journalist George Creel,
wanted to influence public opinion so that it supported the participation of
the United States in World War I with the famous poster " I want you for
US army. "
In the following
years the political communication was evolving with the use of new communication
techniques with very specific purposes depending on which political leaders
governed in each moment. But a good technique of political communication does
not have to translate into good political management or good political action,
as happened in the case of Hitler.
With the development
of technologies, communication and marketing strategies are much more complex
than they were then, and a good Political Communication and a good marketing
strategy are usually synonymous with electoral success. For this reason,
political parties allocate a larger budget for campaigns and make better use of
social networks, one of the most used instruments to get their messages to
society in a closer way.
The Political
Communication is a discipline for which more and more companies are looking for
a qualified staff and professionals in the digital field, where according to
experts is their present and their future.
The communication is
composed of eight key elements:
Emitter and receiver.
In the first place we
find the two protagonists of the communicative process: sender and receiver. In
politics, an adequate definition of both is important for any communicative
situation. In the case of the issuer, it is very important to differentiate the
messages that are made from the organization, those that are carried out in a
personal capacity by the members of the same and those that are made based on a
public position. It is important that in any case there is a coherence with
respect to the political project, but many communicative errors come from
communicating each message from an inappropriate position as an issuer, such as
announcing government measures from a political meeting. The definition of the receiver
is equally or more important, because it greatly determines our ability to
adapt the message, codes and channels to their specific circumstances.
Objectives and
expectations.
Two other elements
related to sender and receiver are, respectively, the objectives and
expectations. The effectiveness of a communication depends on an accurate
visualization of the objective that pursues the same, at the same time as it
manages to detect and adapt to the expectations of the receiver. There is no
worse way to communicate than to do it without intention, without a reason,
because it is an energy and time wasted and, most likely, a source of
communicative errors. In the same way, when the receiver feels that his
expectations are being frustrated, the communication is evaded or cut off,
making it completely ineffective.
The message and the
channel.
Two more elements are
the message and the channel through which it is transmitted. Both are
intimately related, because the channel influences the message in the same way
as the message to the channel. The variety of linguistic, graphic, spatial and
other codes that make up the message is so broad that it would require separate
treatment. The important thing is that these resources are adapted to both the
receiver's expectations and the issuer's objectives. The adequacy of the sender
to the channel is important because they make one type or another of messages
more effective. Each channel requires its own learning in the use of its own
resources. For example, that a politician is a very good columnist does not
mean that he defends himself in a radio debate.
The answer and the
context.
Other relevant
elements are the response and the context. The answer, in politics, is
traditionally given in the form of a poll or a vote. But the technological
revolution that is taking place in the media is opening up many channels of
interaction with the public that the parties can take advantage of if they know
how to use them properly. The context is everything that surrounds each
communicative situation. It is one of the aspects that most have tried to
control in politics, both for security issues and for an important aversion to
improvisation. The biggest communicative challenge of many politicians is to
improve their ability to respond effectively to dynamic or changing contexts.
Good communicative
management implies taking responsibility for each of the elements in each
situation.
Focusing on the
message without taking good care of who the sender is, choosing an
inappropriate channel according to the recipient or not integrating the
objectives well with expectations are examples of misuses in political
communication.
Written:
Omar Colmenares
Trujillo