Page 127 - The Handbook of Persuasion and Social Marketing

Persuasion in the Political Context 119

Gotlieb, Nah, & McLeod, 2007). This implies that when audience mem-
bers do not have a construct available to them in memory and the con-
struct is not provided in a news story, a frame that applies the construct in
a message will not be effective (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).
Viewed from this perspective, framing is a stage that follows priming in
persuasion message development (see Allen et al., 1994). In the case of
primed issues, framing specifies the way in which the messages are to be
interpreted. In the case of primed images, framing most often leads to the
justification of the evaluation of a politician and/or to the definition of the
politician’s responsibility for particular, important political events.
The assumed result of political persuasion through priming and framing
is: (1) changing and/or establishing standards that people use to make eval-
uations of candidates, parties, and governments; (2) suggesting the justifi-
cation for these evaluations by determining the causal relationship between
them and the factors accountable for their occurrence (attributions of causal
versus treatment responsibility; Iyengar, 1991); and (3) shaping particular
attitudes toward political issues. Evoking the desired behavior is the further
and main anticipated consequence of political persuasion. The goal is for
citizens to support a given candidate or a party; approve of the govern-
ment’s or the president’s job and support particular political actions (e.g.,
implementing reforms or engaging in a military intervention abroad); and
ultimately develop a stable relationship, built on trust, with a politician.
Politics is about persuasion, and political marketing largely relies on
rational planning and developing persuasive strategies, predominantly
based on psychological knowledge and principles, to shape people’s be-
liefs, attitudes, and behavior (Cwalina & Falkowski, 2000). On the one
hand, contemporary political marketing penetrates politics to a larger and
larger extent —a phenomenon which Moloney (2007) calls “policy-by-
marketing.” It is criticized from an ethical standpoint as undermining de-
mocracy because of its ability to promote populism and to manipulate and
mislead voters. It contributes to the misperception of political processes
and the ease with which solutions can be traded and implemented. Political
marketing subjects politics to the consumer-like forces of business man-
agement and the market (see Cwalina et al., 2011).
On the other hand, political marketing has a positive influence on the
stability and development of democracy, as well. O’Shaughnessy (1987)
points out that, at least to some extent, it can support the growth of an issue-
oriented “political nation,” distinguished from the older base of political
support by greater commitment to narrower issues and the possession of
detailed and intimate information. Furthermore, political marketing con-
tributes to filtering down the knowledge of a variety of marketing tools and