Is It Groupthink Or Just Good, Old-fashioned Idiocy

 

Just over a year ago, I wrote the following on Prop 8, a ballot measure regarding gay marriage,

Watching the No on 8 campaign, it’s really been so much preaching to the converted half the time and getting its ass kicked the other half. It’s painful to watch, but not as painful as November 5th will be if Prop 8 passes.

Two days later, Prop 8 passed. Sad story. The lesson I walked away with from last year’s election was counter the main narrative. It didn’t fail because Californians are bigoted or the Mormons have money or any of those reasons. It failed because the No on 8 campaign did a terrible, terrible job.

A year ago, I alleged groupthink and still think so. However, given how common the strategic failures of the No on 8 campaign play out in political messaging, I’m beginning to think we need fewer group(non)thinkers and more Madison Avenue types. The airwaves aren’t college debating unions, they’re the airwaves. A place for emotion, human interest, sympathy, identification, and occasionally news and facts.

What we’ve seen as the single greatest effect of talking points has been the neutering of effective political communication. We don’t – or rather the parties and pundits don’t – sell ideas so much as they trigger emotions. Usually anger, fear, or both.

The sad part is, we just don’t see it. Democrats see liberal stock phrases and talking points and are impressed, often uncritical, and think “this is a compelling argument, clearly moral and/or intellectual people will be persuaded.” Republicans see conservative stock phrases and talking points and do the same think but think, “this argument appeals to ‘hard-working’ Americans with values.”

The short version is each side crafts a message that appeals to people like them, defined ever so implicitly as “the good people,” and then are either baffled at the lack of traction or convinced of the bad qualities of the people who remain unpersuaded. (They’re dumb, callous, lack a heart, are selfish, don’t care about the children, love control, hate freedom, etc…)

Our belief in the self-evident goodness of our own values and positions blinds us not just to the need to convince others of why something is important but also to the best way to do so. In that, political messaging is not years or decades but centuries behind commercial advertising/messaging.

It’s bad enough that this increasingly large blind spot has rendered the Republican party – and conservatives broadly – incapable of presenting many things beyond other dishonest emotional appeals or sour grapes. However, the very good causes that liberal activists routinely bungle deserve better, certainly better advocates.

Voters of all stripes need to be given information, wooed, and appreciated. Instead, we try to buy them off or shame them. People don’t buy Coke because they’re afraid of Pepsi, angry at Brad Garrett’s out of character endorsement of 7-UP, or even because they’re worried those adorable polar bears will be out of a job if they don’t. They buy it because it looks good, it looks rewarding, it reminds them of good times and comforting ideals.

People buy the iPhone because it looks useful, because it fits their life and lifestyle, it’s cool.

Supporters of gay marriage or those on the fence don’t see that a storm is coming and think, “gee I didn’t really care but now that I know it may start raining gay and inside my child’s school, naturally I’ll vote against SSM.” It just doesn’t happen. Likewise opponents or those on the fence about healthcare reform don’t see commercials and think, “well nevermind all of my unaddressed concerns, helping people is good and I’m a person so well I guess I should vote for the pro-people side.” It just doesn’t happen.

So we get crappy ads, attack ads, transparent spin, and talking points. All of which turn off more people than they attract them and bring the worst aides, pollsters, political operatives, and politicians into the work of governing our country.

When we start looking at voters like customers, the need to understand them, as opposed to trading in caricature, becomes all the more evident. Both sides have done a better job of aiming their appeals at independents and moderates but their respective inabilities to craft arguments that will penetrate further is taking a toll on this country.

Good ads won’t solve all our problems or magically reform Albany or Sacramento or Washington. They will, however, start engaging the public in a positive, attractive way. They will start seeing gains on matters of importance and urgency from health care reform and the environment to education and civil/gay rights. I, for one, would prefer that we start actually advancing interests instead of hacks and parties.

 

~ by Kyle on November 8, 2009.