About a year ago I was in the middle of the continent with about a dozen prospective candidates. I said I was going to show them my secret political weapon that had been successful with hundreds of candidates, cabinet officers and heads of government. I pulled out some hand sanitizer from my brief case, which I use when I'm on the road up to 150 days per year.
The fact is, if you shake 1,000 hands, you'll get a cold. Then you'll be either out of the game or performing below optimum for a week. In a short campaign, you can't afford the time off. I advised the candidates to use the sanitizer often, and out of the sight of TV cameras.
Very often winning campaigns boil down to such mundane issues as hand sanitizer. After all, name recognition, personal contact with voters and image play huge rolls in electoral wins.
That last word “image” is a controversial one for me as I counsel leaders in industry, government and politics. Many have the impression image is frivolous, like getting your colors done. But academic study shows there is most often a lot of substance behind that apparently superficial image.
Voters in a democracy have no obligation to keep themselves informed. They have a right to, but no obligation. Those who want to be informed are allowed to choose the depth of information they want, the frequency of their searches and the media to consume. One citizen may scour conspiracy sites on the internet, and another subscribe to Foreign Affairs Magazine.
Most readers of this publication know huge numbers of young voters get their political information from late night TV comedy shows. Superficial, you might think. But I've been a journalist, taught journalism and studied the news media as an academic, and I can assure you that David Letterman produces a better interview with a political figures on many occasions than do the big time interviewers on 60 minutes. Jon Stewart on Comedy Central does the same with a little more schtick.
By the way, there's also nothing new about political figures on late night TV. It didn't start with Bill Clinton playing the sax or even Ronald Regan on Johnny Carson. Richard Nixon was a guest on Laugh In and Bobby Kennedy campaigned for JFK on Jack Paar's Tonight Show.
Neither is preparing and rehearsing for political appearances new. One of the rabble rousers in the French Revolution hired an actress to make him a better speaker. Demosthenes was his own media trainer in ancient Greece. He put pebbles in his mouth and tried to be heard over roar of waves at the beach, in an effort to become a more compelling speaker.
So those who think democracy is going to hell in a handbasket because of the TV age's preoccupation with image should be sent to the woodshed to read 19th Century political pamphlets or early 20th Century yellow journalism or even look at the ethical problems early radio and TV stations had. There are many old examples of what we could be categorized as libel or even hate crimes.
And those who don't feel it's fair for late night comedians to make fun of political figures should look at the blistering cartoons done by Conde Nast, which helped topple Tammany Hall figures in New York in the late 19th Century. They should also consider whether the media circus that flourishes around today's campaigns does democracy any more harm than the smoke filled back rooms that picked candidates before about 1950.
So, preoccupation with image isn't new, and image building isn't necessarily bad. In business, we don't fault an executive who purposefully sets out to add line items to her resume for future job prospects. Why should we fault the politician who tries to do the same thing?
In fact, academics say that issues are hard for many voters to understand. Moreover, the issues during a campaign may well not be the ones a candidate has to deal with when elected. The academics conclude that images is more easily understood and transmitted than issues, and image is not too bad a criteria with which to judge candidates.
TV journalists have a simpler way of describing all this: “the camera doesn't lie.” Sure, the camera gets fooled some of the time, but Kennedy actually was cool, Ronald Regan did have a happy disposition. Richard Nixon was tricky and Jimmy Carter was a nice, decent guy in over his head.
So what are the rules of cultivating and transmitting a positive image? First of all, “be yourself” sounds contradictory. If that works, what do I do for a living as I help people with their images? Too many public figures seem to be playing the role they think they should, rather than the one they are committed to. I want to get to get politicians to think beyond the platitudes in their stock speeches to what they really think, feel and believe. Then, I want them to look as if they think, feel and believe. In cases where they're not sure, I have them draw their messages in stick figures. Pictures are concrete, but words can be vague. Drawing clears the air.
Non-verbal communication though, accounts for between 50 and 75 per cent of a politician's impact. Open, double hand gestures with palms at a 45 degree angle and elbows at 90 degrees is a great start. Leaning into the dialogue by about 2 degrees from the waist shows you're engaged. Slower movements are best for TV. Body language should get bigger for bigger audiences.
Eye contact is vital. If you've ever been to a party where the person you're speaking with is looking over your shoulder for a more important person to chat up, you'll understand how a speaker needs to maintain eye contact. With one person, look as if you are totally engaged and don't take your eyes off her. In a big crowd, move eye contact slowly among people in each quadrant of the room. Stick with one person for a few sentences or points and then move on.
Clothing presents challenges for both male and female politicians. In the heat, you want to stay cool, but linen wrinkles. So-called micro fibers, that even the big Italian designers favor, are basically as cool as wearing plastic. If you can get a mohair and wool blend, it's like having a little steel wool woven in. The mohair keeps a crease but the air blows right through.
The general rule is to dress “one-up” from the audience. If it's the Board of Trade lunch, your best suit is in order. If you're campaigning at a factory gate, a blazer and open shirt is still one up. In a farmer's field or soup kitchen, cotton chinos and a plaid shirt might be the choice.
You don't want what you are wearing to distract voters from you and your message. Bracelets, dangling earrings and gold neck chains are usually a distraction. On TV they can create a video “flare” like you see on country and western singer's suits and guitars. Tight patterns such as Harris Tweed, glen check or hounds tooth can do the same. Men need executive socks and women need longer hem lines for modesty when sitting and getting in and out of cars. Women can approximate the authoritative version of the suit and tie with a jacket, scarf, broach or pearls.
Once a candidate has decided on the right wardrobe, one good trick is to buy three versions of everything. If you're getting in and out of cars, sleeping on planes and tramping through crowds or farmers' fields, you'll be wrinkly and coffee-stained. With three identical outfits, you have one to wear, one being pressed, and one hanging up ready for the next pit stop. Advance people should have scouted out places to change. It puts a damper on the event, if the candidate has just had to change pantyhose in a dingy garage washroom. The locations of dry cleaners for minor repairs and pressing should be on the itinerary, whether they are used or not.
Candidates need to be comfortable. You need to have frank discussions about support hose for men and women, low heals, spongy soles, gel inserts and anything else that can make being on your feet 14 hours a day bearable. Socks should be changed mid-day and shoes daily to prevent blisters and fatigue. Whatever will allow the candidate to sleep must be procured, such as eye shades, ear plugs, white noise machines or neck pillows.
In the end, a fresh, pressed, bright candidate who can work an extra hour a day without falling asleep or telling a reporter to “shove it” can make the difference on election day. Victory is in the details.
Allan Bonner has coached eight heads of government and several
dozen cabinet level politicians. He is the author of several
books on communication and can be reached at Click here to contact this Author
