Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Voters likely to reward passion, not silly slogans

By Neil Lawrence - posted Thursday, 22 July 2010


Things generally continue the way they start out.

If that's the case, we're in for a long and painful 2010 election advertising campaign.

The degree of comment from journalists and the public alike on the campaign slogans, advertising and rhetoric in the first week of the campaign is unprecedented. None of it has been remotely flattering.

Advertisement

Keating speechwriter and author Don Watson wanted to hand in his ALP membership card five minutes into the campaign. "Moving forward," he said, is "a lump of dead meat ripped straight from the corporate world".

He can only be grateful they didn't make it "Moving forward together into the future".

On Monday's The 7.30 Report on ABC1, it looked for a moment that Kerry O'Brien would go down on his knees to beg Gillard to not keep repeating "moving forward".

His discomfort wasn't, one suspects, just because he couldn't imagine enduring the pain of 30 more days of this, but more because he knows there is something much better on offer.

When you hear Gillard speak from her heart and about ideas she genuinely believes in, she is charismatic and convincing.

I'm assured the same is true of Tony Abbott. His passionate if slightly erratic performance since becoming leader struck a real chord, at least with his own base, and was spreading.

Advertisement

But seen through the filter of their launch commercials and slogans, both Abbott and Gillard are cardboard cut-outs. Dull, uninspired, uninspiring.

It's worth pondering for a moment what the slogans reveal about the upcoming campaign.

At their best, slogans capture the core strategy of a campaign - the main dividing line and battleline on which the parties seek to differentiate themselves and fight it out.

It's been suggested that "moving forward" is really code for moving away from past Kevin Rudd-associated polices that have been determined to be electoral liabilities. It's a tempting proposition, but probably wrong.

It's taken Labor only two days to launch its first negative ad, focusing on Abbott's record as health minister. It concludes with: "Don't go backwards". We will hear more of this line, particularly in relation to WorkChoices.

"Moving forward" then makes sense only in relation to the negative campaign - "don't go backwards" - that will be run against Abbott.

What it doesn't mean is the laying out of grand visions for Australia's future. I don't think we'll see the start of any new revolutions, be they educational, building, environmental or any other.

The Liberal Party line is less obvious, or perhaps just more confusing: "Stand up for Australia, stand up for real action".

The "real action" component seems to be a hangover from when they thought their campaign would be fought against Kevin Rudd. There was a growing narrative that Rudd was full of grand plans but lacked the ability or political courage to realise them. It was a line of attack that Abbott successfully prosecuted.

But Gillard has done a Morris Iemma. (Remember his 2007 election clunker: "More to do, but heading in the right direction"?) She has turned herself and the party into its own opposition and discarded electorally troubling policies. She has taken effective action and thus robbed the potency of that line of attack.

"Stand up for Australia"? Is it a subtle reference to border protection, an issue the Coalition believes is one of its strongest? Does it come from a belief that Australians want tougher decisions to be made? It's not clear, and so far neither is the Liberal campaign direction.

The main thing one can discern from the Liberals' opening ad is that they think being old-fashioned works to their advantage. The singing of "Stand up, stand up for real action" will be to some embarrassingly hokey. But perhaps to others it is just relaxed and comfortable, a reminder of more steady and predictable days.

If O'Brien was begging for something more than vacuous slogans, so are most Australians.

So why has it come to this? Campaign discipline is fine and necessary, but it's not enough.

There is an assumption with the operatives in both parties that "the punter", itself a derogatory or at least disrespectful term, is disengaged from day-to-day politics, political initiatives and manoeuvrings.

That is largely correct.

But people are not stupid. Today's voter is more literate, sceptical, communication savvy and discerning of real motives than ever before.

They've seen the spin from everyone from the Catholic Church to Tiger Woods to BP, and they get it and are sick of it.

The success of programs such as ABC's The Gruen Transfer shows an appetite for understanding modern communication. While the viewing audience is being entertained, it is also being educated.

But the advertising and their associated slogans, if the opening salvos are any guide, ignore this changed environment and are barely different from campaigns run in the 1980s and 90s.

The ALP's first negative ad has nearly all the usual ingredients. Ugly black-and-white photos of Abbott, a threatening drone in the background, the inevitable red stamp. The only change from the past formula is the use of a female voice. Is this progress?

There is a belief that it doesn't matter if the Kerry O'Briens of the world end up with tears of frustration because the mortgage belt, the swinging voters, the "punters" need the endless repetition and oversimplification to get through to them.

That thinking is outdated.

These are people with high aspirations for themselves and their families. They feel burdened by mortgages and cost of living increases, concern for their community and country, and they are crying out for something better than either party is plating up at the moment.

I doubt that advertising will have much of a determining influence in this election, but the leader who moves beyond its tedious constraints and engages with something real and substantial, who argues their case with skill and passion and treats voters with respect, could have a powerful effect on the campaign outcome.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

First published in The Australian on July 21, 2010.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

25 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Neil Lawrence is the founder of Lawrence Creative Strategy and executive creative director of STW. He was the creative mind behind the Kevin07 campaign, credited with helping Kevin Rudd win the 2007 federal election.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 25 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy