Page 35 - The Professionalisation of Political Communication Chaning Media, Changing Europe Volume 3

Political Communication.qxd 12/7/06 7:30 pm Page 32
Political Communication.qxd 5/1/07 15:05 Page 34

32 | THE PROFESSIONALISM OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

However, there are two obvious difficulties in such uses of the word professionalisation.
The first difficulty is that such uses of the term often imply that what went on before
was ‘amateurish’ and consequently ineffective. This can be seen in the Farrell, Kolodny
and Medvic extract quoted above (p. xx): here we find a very broad-brush approach to
change that purposely highlights the differences that they seek to identify.
Unfortunately, the broad-brush approach exaggerates differences and can overlook
significant continuities in practices and activities. So, for example, what are the key
distinguishing characteristics between the amateur and the professional campaign: is it
the personnel, their part-time as opposed to their full-time nature, their knowledge
base, or the organisation of the campaign? Or a combination of all of these? And does
this point to continuities rather than breaks in the transformation of parties and
electioneering practices?

The second difficulty is linked to the above: who and what has become more
professional, and what criteria are actually used to differentiate the professional from
the non-professional? Is it to do with practice or theory, and what level of practice or
theory? Is professionalisation a process of simply making communication more
effective through updating and enhancing the modes for delivering a political message
(so that everyone can become a professional)? Or is it related to the employment of
those skilled in ‘professional’ communication activities – public relations experts, image
consultants, data analysts, etc – to manage the campaign? And can the term also be
applied to elected representatives?

Given the difficulties of identifying those characteristics that would allow us to
distinguish between an amateur campaign and a professional one, or a professional
communicator from an amateur communicator, in a way that does not raise further
The Professionalisation of Political Communication
problems, it may be best to treat the phrase as a general descriptor of a whole series of
changes that have taken place over time that lead to what is perceived to be a more
efficient and more sophisticated use of personnel and facilities for organisation and
communication. From the perspective of the political party, the professionalisation of
political communication can be deemed to be the process of adaptation by which they
change their structures and practices in order to meet new and continually changing
circumstances and their use of experts in order to achieve their goals. To give an example:
political parties in the twenty first century have to find ways to cope with the web and
its potential. Devising strategies to meet that objective, and adapting their practices to
do so, is part of a process of change and, in our understanding, of professionalisation of
their activities. The critical point, as far as our analysis is concerned, is that, over time,
political parties have always sought to adapt to their environment – e.g. to deal with
the press, radio, television, polling data, or quantitative data – and that, consequently, it
is inappropriate to think of earlier periods as being less professional than later ones
since the contexts and circumstances are always different. It may be, therefore, that the
professional organisation is the organisation that never stands still; it is also an
organisation that is reflective.
34