Words as ideas: The soundbite trophy, right now, goes to frontrunner Obama. McCain's graphics were originally developed by a defense industry promoter. Selling ideas to the consumers populace is the art of branding.
Obama branded himself as the Change Agent. The daily candidate bite is around 7.8 seconds. Blips stick and the snippets count. Americans are dumb and getting dumber. Details don't matter. "Words matter. ...What our leaders say matters," Obama said this week.
One of the political communications tactics that Bush introduced and perfected was the background set: a sea of slogans behind him as he spoke. This focus on branding is similar to the red carpet backgrounds for the stars -- the slogans/logos are big enough to be visible and legible for the cameras. Obama's big banner behind him doesn't make it into the camera but his podium slogan does and those behind him were holding up their red signs echoing the talking point.
The semantics of the repetitive sound bite, the talking point, the phrase, the slogan. The branding of the product, program, personality, policy or idea. This is how things are sold. Especially today. (Read the Dumbing of America, yesterday's WaPo article by Susan Jacoby, author of The Age of American Unreason where she talks about the shrinking attention span, the erosion of general knowledge and the inability to grasp complexity).
The semiotics of it all is something I'm very interested in. My school studies at The New School had historical roots in this area, sociologically, and the strands of the German founding thinkers lead to West Coast studies and George Lakoff is probably the most well-known from that line. He has taken up advising the Democrats on the power of words and ideas to counter the expertise of the Republicans on this front. Fred Luntz uses meters to measure public response to words. Words express ideas. Art expresses ideas. It is the idea today that matters. I wrote yesterday about the iteration of these ideas, graphically.
Lakoff looked at Obama vs. Hillary and the semantics of the issues and ideas. Most voters do not vote primarily on the basis of policies, but rather on (1) values, (2) connection, (3) authenticity, (4) trust, and (5) identity. Lakoff writes: Obama understands this. Hillary is "I, I, I" while Obama is "you, we"...
"I promise you, my friends... we are the makers of history, not its friends," is what McCain said in his celebratory speech last Tuesday. "Hope is a powerful thing.... I've seen mens' hopes tested in powerful ways....my hope for our country resides in my faith in the American character..." ooops. Couldn't get the rest of McCain's speech as my husband turned the tv off. What more can I say? Ok. He turned it back on after my squawk... "My country saved me," McCain says... "I'm running to serve America and to champion the ideas... to make in our time, and from our challenges, a stronger country and a better world. I intend to do that by fighting for the principals and policies that best serve the American people," he continues. My husband is not paying attention while I type the words he's using. As some say about McCain's rhetoric: TLDR*: McCain's use of the pronoun "I" is extensively heavy. I, I, I. "I will not yield. I promise you, my friends, I'm fired up and ready to go." Just like Hillary, all of those I, I I's.
Obama has primed the people for the we's.
Obama's own rhetoric has created imagery via words like progress, hope and 'yes we can'. Obama's words have an evolutionary/revolutionary quality about them. The repetition of words then becomes representative of the brand, the idea. Obama is now "Yes We Can." What do these words now represent? The idea behind these words: hope & change.
The war of snippits, of branding, of tag lines will turn on these words as semantics is fought in soundbites.
Related Media/Political Culture Communication Posts:
Rhetoric, from Aristotle to Obama
The Obama Poster
Presidential Campaign Logos
Word Art: Talking Points
The Che Factor
Political Art: Powerful Tools in the Icon Age
latest:Hottest Political Art for the Presidential Campaign
The O for All: A New World Logo
*TDLR=too long didn't read
Just last week I was challenging my students to THINK about what the candidates were saying, to go beyond the snippets and soundbites. I loved the article Dumbing of America. I plan to have my students read that for an assignment and write a reaction paper. Thanks for always making me think!!
Posted by: allison | February 18, 2008 at 09:27 AM
Brilliant! Now I don't have to research all this for myself. You have done it!
I wonder if there are enough people like me around who think when politicians say "I" they are taking responsibility for who they are and what they stand for. When they say "you" they mean they are telling me who I am and what I think, which I do not like. When they say "we" they are including me in a group I may or may not want to belong to.
And "they..." well, that's another story, isn't it?
Every little pronoun has a meaning all its own.
Yes, it is quite a fascinating election year.
Posted by: Hattie | February 18, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Aargh! But of course the Democrats will have to pony up to the machine that the Republicans have developed in order to compete against their tactics. Yes, an interesting year, especially with all the commentary from you and the articles you reference.
Posted by: tut-tut | February 18, 2008 at 01:57 PM
Very interesting, Ms. Pie. Nice piece.
Posted by: Old Horsetail Snake | February 18, 2008 at 02:06 PM
did i mention when you posted it that the obama poster--quite striking--seems very 1930s to me. that time in u.s. and italy reflected in woodcut style, bold colors.
local public radio had good program about sarah boxer's BLOG book. more than the book deserves but intriguing bloggers exchanging. posted about it; you might be interested.
Posted by: naomi dagen bloom | February 18, 2008 at 05:46 PM
the question I keep asking myself is, "what are the candidates saying"?
It's like I'm listening to the same commercial over and over again.
argh!
Posted by: Rhonda | February 18, 2008 at 05:56 PM
Excellent piece here. Language is so critical, can be of such subtle influence even when the words are obvious, but so many so naive about that fact.
Posted by: joared | February 19, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Great stuff as always, Mother!
(I've been away for a long time, but,in the words of Hannibal Lecter, "I need to come out of retirement and return to public life," lol).
Hope youre well!
I think its so interesting what youre getting into here, youve really nailed it: The subtext and significance of the message beyond the sound and surface structure of the word.
Semiotics is an area that really needs to be brought into the realm of new media studies more. Its a key discipline I think. As I say these days, I don't want to hire J-school grads, I want bloggers with interests in sociology, epistemology, semiotics, and network theory. Thats what future journalists will be made of...
Posted by: Stefan Dill | February 29, 2008 at 07:57 PM