Newswise — MANHATTAN, Kan. -- The ads, the speeches, the tweets, the rhetoric -- presidential campaigns have begun in America.
Presidential campaigns provide a near-continuous dialogue on the nation's political, social and economic future. While these issues are important, communication skills remain integral for a successful presidential campaign, according to several Kansas State University political communication and media experts.
"Communication is at the core of every political campaign," said Soo-Hye Han, assistant professor of communication studies and a political communication specialist. "Certainly issues like the economy and foreign policy matter, but the way candidates convey their ideas to the voters is through communication, and the success of a candidate hinges on his or her ability to communicate messages effectively to the electorate. That’s why political campaigners spend most of their campaign money on crafting messages and communicating them to voters."
Rhetoric in presidential campaigns not only serves strategic purposes, but also is also valuable for democracy, Han said. While many voters are turned off by the negativity in political campaigns, campaign messages are the primary means for voters to learn about candidates and their priorities, as well as the concerns of their country and fellow citizens.
"The very act of crafting effective campaign messages forces candidates to consider the needs of the public and to speak to those needs in forthcoming ways," Han said.
As a result, rhetoric in political campaigns connects voters with their nation's leaders and fellow citizens.
With the development of mass media and the rise of candidate-centered politics, campaign rhetoric has been increasingly important. Political parties no longer determine the election, Han said. In modern presidential elections, candidates must appeal to the voters directly and with greater frequency. The increased amount of candidate-to-voter interaction and millions of competing messages and advertisements create the necessity of ensuring a distinct voice for candidates.
"They have to sell themselves amid a cacophony of competing messages that are trying to grab people's attention," Han said. "Crafting an effective message that can cut through the clutter has become extremely important."
Social media has aided candidates in their quest to effectively engage voters. Numerous tools are available to exchange information and ideas from voters to candidates, voters to nonvoters, and candidates to voters and nonvoters. But this has also increased scrutiny of a candidates' every action. It is a marked contrast to campaigns of the past where image control was considerably easier, according to Charles J.G. Griffin, associate professor and head of the department of communication studies, theater and dance.
"When Lincoln was elected to be president, maybe 2 percent of the public had ever seen a president or a presidential candidate, so it was easier, ironically, to control the image," Griffin said. "We talk about how sophisticated image control is now, but it was much easier to control in the old days."
Media portrayals of candidates are widely influential in public perceptions. Visual information is processed faster and more effectively than the alternatives, according to Todd Simon, professor of journalism and mass communications. The effects of visceral reactions became apparent in the 1960 presidential campaign. Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy's famous debate changed the tone of the campaign. Kennedy appeared poised and confident, while Nixon looked pale and sickly. Kennedy was elected president -- and Nixon learned his lesson, according to Simon.
"Nixon recognized that visual presentation to the public made a difference," Simon said. "He hired advisers that would help him show off in a visual setting. Forty years later, we just keep refining techniques that the Nixon consulting team put together in 1968."
Political advertising has varying levels of success in shaping public perceptions. Hillary Clinton released a series of nationally circulated advertisements in the 2008 primaries that many believed were going to undercut then-candidate Barack Obama, according to Simon. Instead, Obama cruised to victory. Such an approach only works if people vote, Simon said, and focusing on likely voters has traditionally yielded the best results.
"Microtargeting is more important than reaching the most people," he said. "There's a recognized source of wisdom on that and that's Karl Rove on a national campaign level. Rove really mastered the concept of microtargeting to select groups that were more likely to vote then not."
President Obama's success in 2008 was also focused on his oratorical skills. Obama succeeded by galvanizing and mobilizing voters across the nation with his inspirational rhetoric of hope and change. As president, this skill has waned, becoming less comparable to an inspirational leader and more professional. The change was inevitable, according to Han.
"The rhetoric of governance is more complicated than the rhetoric of campaigning," Han said. "When campaigning, you can be bold, abstract and hopeful. But when governing, you are dealing with the nitty-gritty of everyday politics and policymaking and your rhetoric has to be cautious, specific and realistic."
While the direction of his challengers becomes more apparent, Obama's message for 2012 is still to be determined.
"How will he negotiate the rhetoric of governance and the rhetoric of campaigning in 2012? That’s the topic we -- scholars, journalists, strategists, candidates, and voters -- will be discussing for the next several months," Han said. "Will we see the inspirational orator once again in 2012? We will soon find out."
RSS