The projection of the personal image in politics today
In the last few weeks, it has been difficult to open a paper without coming across fresh claims about the commonality of intimidating, threatening and bullying behaviour within the walls of 10 Downing Street. Many of them target Gordon Brown directly; one of the most recent additions concerns one of Brown’s closest advisors, Stewart Wood, who claims that he was left “shocked and upset” when the Prime Minister pushed him aside during a tense moment in his office. Whilst some have been led to question the stamina of Number 10 staff rather than the character of the Prime Minister, others have enthusiastically jumped at the chance to tarnish the reputation of the entire Labour Party. David Cameron called for an inquiry, stating that it was reflective of a “fag-end of a government that is tired and discredited”. Meanwhile, the opposition leaders have been keen to paint themselves as the sort of approachable, caring chaps who would be more likely to sit you down with a box of Kleenex and ask about your boyfriend’s commitment problems than scream about your incompetency and throw a stapler at your head. We had David ‘call-me-Dave’ Cameron lamenting about his struggle to prevent his daughter from being corrupted by foul-mouth Lily Allen lyrics, while a brief glance at Nick Clegg’s official website shows a charming photo of him breakfasting with his pretty Spanish wife.
It is difficult to find an MP’s website that does not refer to their penchant for ballroom dancing, their participation in a local football club or devotion to their family pug. The growing importance of individual personality traits to electoral success has been a significant development in post-war politics, and seems to play a particularly strong role in the current run-up to the general election. One possible contributing factor is the de-stratification of political parties. In the mid twentieth century, parties were largely class-based organisations, with clear ideologies and high levels of membership. In the last 25 years alone, membership of the main political parties has declined by almost two-thirds. As both Labour and The Conservatives have edged increasingly closer to the centre of the political spectrum, the electorate are increasingly confused as to who will best represent their values and implement policies accordingly. Each of the three main parties promise to address the same concerns – reduce child poverty, cut crime and unemployment, improve state education and health – in varying but not markedly different ways. In the race for votes, they all know which buzz-lines will look good to the electorate. No-one will emphasise leniency in criminal sentencing for fear of appearing ‘soft on crime’; nor would they dare to imply that they might significantly cut funding for vital public services. Given this confusing spectrum of identical promises, it is hardly surprising that voters have come to rely increasingly on the representative’s personality when choosing their favoured party. Leaders have thus come to represent their parties in ways that they rarely did in the past.
Another significant change in the last twenty years has been the accessibility of politicians via television and the internet. The Erik Gandini documentary, ‘Videocracy’, argues that Silvio Berlusconi has surrounded himself with a celebrity-obsessed world, in which “the President of television is the President of the whole country”. Barbara Matera, a serving MEP and former television presenter, had no discernible political experience prior to being put forward for election by Berlusconi. She followed in the footsteps of former topless glamour model and Minister for Equal Opportunities, Mara Carfagna. Whilst the UK has not levelled Italy in its overlapping of the political and celebrity spheres, the internet has certainly provided a wealth of opportunities for politicians to ‘engage’ with the general public. Nick Clegg’s twitter page features wishes for his Welsh followers to have a happy St David’s Day (no, not that David) and links to question and answer sessions via Twitter and Facebook. The website ‘Tweetminster’ offers a livestream of tweets from MPs and political commentators. Politicians are not wrong in thinking that this is a powerful mode of communication: just look at the US president, whose personality and personal life are arguably more significant to his political standing than anywhere else in the world. Barack Obama’s twitter page has over three million followers, and his public persona is widely recognised as one of the most finely crafted in political history. His good looks and popular, stylish wife certainly seem fairly central to widespread comparisons between himself and the late JFK.
Whatever the reasons behind it, the politicians of the past would, no doubt, be flabbergasted at the degree of scrutiny under which modern politicians live. Winston Churchill, who is frequently voted as our greatest Prime Minister, even the greatest Briton in history, was hardly known for his looks or social etiquette. Few can have failed to have come across his infamous words to Bessie Braddock in response to her accusation that he was “disgustingly drunk”: “Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.”
In contrast to this, the current political arena seems to be a very image conscious place. Should David Miliband become the next leader of the Labour Party, the three leaders would look, to the untrained eye, like a triplet of forty-something, floppy-haired, Call-Me-Dave/Nick PR clones. That’s not to say they are not capable; just that it can only be a matter of time before we open a copy of Hello! to see heart-warming photos of their Boden-clad children playing with pedigree puppies in the manicured gardens of 10 Downing Street.
Related posts: