Page 153 - An Introduction to Political Communication Fifth Edition

Intro to Politics Communication (5th edn)-p.qxp 9/2/11 10:55 Page 132

COMMUNICATING POLITICS
Since Pierre Salinger first persuaded John Kennedy to give live television
news conferences in the early 1960s they have become a presidential
institution in the US. Trading, once again, on the inherent newsworthiness
of presidential utterances and of reportable soundbites and pictures,
presidents seek to impose their reading of events on the political environment
by having it reported at the top of the main news bulletins. Hart’s book-
length study of presidential rhetoric notes that

the presidency has been transferred from a formal, print-oriented
world into an electronic environment specialising in the spoken
word and rewarding casual, interpersonally adept politicians. . . .
Presidents and their staff [have] become expert in [the sociology of
persuasion], and much of their time is devoted to discovering the
best social superstructure for insuring that a given rhetorical event
will proceed smoothly and persuasively.
(1987, p. 61)

In Britain during recent election campaigns each party has begun its day
with a news conference, setting out its ‘theme’ of the day and the issues on
which it hopes to compete with opponents. Thus, in 1997 Labour had a
‘health’ day, the Tories a ‘tax’ day and the Liberal Democrats a ‘proportional
representation’ day. By setting out the issues in this way early in the cam-
paign day, each party hoped to dominate the media agenda with coverage
which would highlight (and favour) its policies, while casting a poor light on
those of the opposition.
In general, news conferences are designed with a view to maximising
coverage. Hence, they will be put on in time to be reported on key news
bulletins and at locations accessible to journalists. None of which ensures,
of course, that coverage will be favourable. The débâcle of ‘Jennifer’s Ear’
(see Chapter 6), when the Labour Party’s attempt to set the 1992 campaign
agenda on health turned into a debate about ethics and manipulation which
challenged the party’s integrity (as it did that of the Conservatives), involved
a series of news conferences in which spokespersons sought to reclaim the
initiative, largely without success. As Butler and Kavanagh observe

the way in which the war of Jennifer’s ear captured the agenda was
the most extraordinary episode in the campaign on the air, expli-
cable only in terms of the mounting frustration amongst journalists
at a boring campaign and the intensity of news management by the
parties. Frustrations boiled over, news management collapsed, the
ratpack soared off out of control, scenting a ‘real’ story at last, and
both parties and broadcasters lurched off course.
(1992, p. 164)

132