Page 61 - The Professionalisation of Political Communication Chaning Media, Changing Europe Volume 3

Political Communication.qxd 5/1/07 15:05 Page 60
Political Communication.qxd 12/7/06 7:30 pm Page 58

58 | THE PROFESSIONALISM OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

amount it spent on advertising in 2003, up … to £138m…’ (Wintour, 2004, p.3). This
figure has grown over the years. In 1992, the government had only spent £53 million in
advertising (at 1992 prices) though this was only a point along a rising curve (Deacon
and Golding,1994).

Overall, then, we are now seeing a process whereby political organisations seek to get
their messages across efficiently and in a manner considered to be professional – or
what is understood to be professional in the current period. And like those
organisations, politicians are themselves also aware of the need for their own activities
to be of a professional standard; hence the need for training and support in handling
the media. In other words, as more and more political activity is mediated, those who
wish to communicate to the public seek ways to ensure that their communication
activities are appropriately undertaken for maximum effect. It is all part of what Deacon
and Golding refer to as ‘a central activity of modern statecraft’(1994,p.7).

CONCLUSION
Professionals, as this chapter has shown, have long been involved with political parties.
That involvement has taken many forms: individuals becoming part of the political
organisation and playing a significant role within it, e.g. O’Brien, Mandelson, but still
pursuing a political career; individuals brought in from outside to run the organisation
for a period of time, e.g. Lord Poole, Lord Woolton; individuals hired, or volunteering, to
give advice and assistance, e.g. pollsters, television and media ‘trainers’. The variety of
the arrangements suggests that there is a particular type of relationship that exists
between those who exercise political power and those who assist, a relationship
whereby those who assist play a role, undoubtedly an important one, within a
framework that is set out by political circumstances. Advisers, experts or professionals
do not create the policy or the party but help the party give itself a form. As Patrick
The Professionalisation of Political Communication
Seyd commented on New Labour’s organisation during the 1997 election, the model
used by the party was a top-down ‘electoral-professional’ one ‘in which policymaking
and campaigning were increasingly professionalised and run by MPs and full-time
officials, and members’ role was to assist…’ (1998, p. 69). That sense of the political
centre holding the reins aptly sums the relationship between political actors and
advisers,at least in the British context.

What are the implications of this for the idea that political communication has become
more professional or is undergoing a process of professionalisation? The argument that
has been developed in this chapter, and in Chapter Two, suggests that political parties
employ experts or professionals in order to gain advantage.The examples given in this
chapter lend support to the point that such developments are by no means new:
training politicians to deal with the media, providing sophisticated polling data,
producing professional-looking political broadcasts, and so on, are all examples of how
political parties adapt to meet new challenges and seek ways to better persuade and
mobilise. At times those new developments are beneficial, as Scammell has argued in
60