Page 20 - The Professionalisation of Political Communication Chaning Media, Changing Europe Volume 3

Political Communication.qxd 5/1/07 15:05 Page 19
Political Communication.qxd 12/7/06 7:30 pm Page 17

POLITICAL COMMUNICATION IN THE ERA OF PROFESSIONALISATION | 17

most European societies, and very often the party connections and political allegiances
of skilled personnel are important considerations in the decision to employ such
experts. The importance of political parties cannot therefore be underestimated and
this may be one of the major differences between the conduct of electoral politics
across Europe and in the US.

But the insertion of professionals into the political communication process at both
party and governmental level leads to a complex set of conditions for both parties and
governments. For governments, it raises the question of the extent to which managing
the agenda is the same as managing and resolving the real problems that they have to
tackle. As Holtz-Bacha points out in this book, there is a ‘professionalisation at two
speeds’ in Germany: that is, ‘when it comes to campaign communication,
professionalisation has come far and progresses quickly, but the process is more
restrained where routine political communication is concerned because the constraints
are more effective where politics is made instead of only being represented.’

For political parties, professionalisation raises the spectre of parties with no members,
or ideologies attempting to persuade the citizens/voters that they are, truly, the best
managers. As Lars Nord notes though, professionalisation will neither kill existing
parties nor give them unlimited success. ‘Instead, it is reasonable to think that the
professionalisation process poses considerable conflicts for the parties regarding their
objectives. They can either become more professionalised and accept the new
conditions for campaigning and opinion formation, or they can remain as a
consolidating party organisation and balance internal interests within the party. In the
first case, they risk party unity and coherence in politics. In the second case, voter
support and political influence are in jeopardy’.

Issue of control and responsibility
This is a more general issue, namely, who is in charge of the professional
communicators and practitioners, especially if they are imported from outside?
Sometimes those employed or, perhaps more properly, used with those skills come
from within the party itself. In Greece, for example, the people who are called political
communication experts are usually party members or affiliates and do not come from
outside the political system, they are, rather, part of it, as we have just noted. The Political Communication in the Era of Professionalisation
difference is that their political marketing techniques have been adapted to the new
communication landscape. Their knowledge on professional communication practices
is not due to any special political communication training, and their relationship with
journalists in the political communication subsystem is still very much characterised by
cooperation for mutual benefit.

In other instances where ‘outsiders’ are employed, there is still a debate as to whether
they determine the strategy, but under the full control of party leaders and employees,
or whether they determine the strategy and consequently the nature and content of 19