Campaign Communication and Political Marketing

Philippe J. Maarek

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2011
• ISBN:
  9781444340693
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Communication Studies
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Campaign Communication and Political Marketing is a comprehensive, internationalist study of the modern political campaign. It indexes and explains their integral components, strategies, and tactics.

• Offers comparative analyses of campaigns from country to country
• Covers topics such as advertising strategy, demography, the effect of campaign finance regulation on funding, and more
• Draws on a variety of internationalcase studiesincluding the campaigns of Barack Obama andNicolas Sarkozy
• Analysesthe impact of digital media and 24/7 news cycle on campaign conduct

Part I

The rise of modern political communication

1

Birth and rise of political marketing in the United States

There can be no doubt that the genesis of modern political marketing is entirely rooted in the history of political communication in the United States. Owing, mainly, to the early development of mass media and later the Internet, the United States was the first country to experiment with modern political communication techniques, and then apply them systematically. These methods have since been imitated throughout the entire world, western democracies being the first to adopt them, as they are quick to share new improvements in media systems.¹

Though the intent of this book is by no means to trace the history of political marketing across the globe, we will nevertheless devote this preliminary chapter to a brief overview of its development in the United States, where it all began.

US domination of modern political marketing was quickly established. Within less than a decade, between the presidential elections of 1952 and 1960, it became an incontrovertible practice, the recent years confirming its significant expansion. But this rapid growth owes nothing to chance. We will first demonstrate that it was fostered by several characteristics inherent to the political information system in the United States before examining the main growth stages of modern American political marketing from infancy (1952/1960), through the formative years (1964/76), to today’s relative “maturity.”

1.1 The grounds for development of modern political marketing in the United States

Three main factors explain the early development of political marketing in the US: its electoral system, its tradition of “political public relations,” and the rapid expansion of modern media.

1.1.1 The particular nature of the electoral system

One of the main causes of the fast growth of political marketing in the United States certainly has to do with the system of primaries in the early stages of presidential election campaigns.

The two major political parties that have shared the favors of American voters since the nineteenth century choose their candidates during their party conventions, the delegates of which are not selected solely by regular party supporters (few in number, except in election years). There are two ways of appointing delegates, depending on the rules that apply in a given state:

• During caucuses, meetings of the local political party members or sympathizers. In the past, these gatherings received little media attention, since they were a relatively small-scale event.
• During the primaries, in existence in some states since 1903, which are virtually early elections. Traditionally, the first primary takes place in mid-February in the small New England state of New Hampshire, thus giving its inhabitants a vastly disproportionate influence in the country’s political agenda. Some of these primaries, including the one in New Hampshire, are “open,” meaning that any registered voter may vote for the candidate of his choice, despite the voter’s stated party preference, while in the other “closed” primaries, ballots must be cast only within the voters’ registered political preference.²

By its very nature, the primaries system encourages the consumption of immense amounts of political information:

• First, on a quantitative level, given that the primaries system duplicates each electoral campaign, the primaries campaign sometimes lasts longer than the actual campaign for the seat. For instance, the presidential primaries run from January to June every four years, whereas the actual campaign starts only mid-July, after the appointment of the candidates by their party convention, and runs until the first Tuesday in November.
• Second, on a qualitative level, since to be designated as party candidate, politicians must not only obtain the endorsement of a few followers, but must undertake a full-scale campaign among their party’s sympathizers to persuade them to tick their name on the primary ballot, rather than another member of their own party, with whom they are bound to share many of the same opinions. This kind of campaign therefore paradoxically requires a much greater public relations and political communication effort from a qualitative standpoint than the actual campaign to come: it is considerably more difficult to convince voters to choose one candidate over another who expresses similar political ideas than it is to convince them not to vote for a politician from an opposition party, in which case arguments can easily be based on ideological differences.

The influence of the mix of “open” and “closed” primaries carries some weight, particularly when no party candidate clearly emerges from the start, and may also endanger the candidate more or less tacitly endorsed by party officials. For instance, in 1992, initially an obscure outsider alongside his seasoned Democratic opponents, Bill Clinton slowly rose above them through the primaries trail to become the Democratic candidate.³ Similarly, among the Republicans, John McCain’s first attempt to run for president in 2000 was initially aided by some “open” primaries, in which he outbalanced a more traditionally positioned George W. Bush: more than one Democrat sympathizer was then able to cast his vote for him!⁴

This basic fact alone explains the over-consumption of political information in the United States, and also the speed with which new political marketing methods are adopted. This over-consumption has continued to rise from year to year due to the increasing number of primary elections throughout the country. During the 1970s, several states decided to ingratiate themselves with the media coverage that goes with holding a primary election, rather than to hold a simple caucus. In 1976 only 29 states held primaries and/or caucuses, whereas 40 were held in 1992 and now 63 in 2008 including 38 primaries! Today, the primaries system had been implemented in most states, with very few exceptions.⁵ The most influential of the caucuses takes place in Iowa, mainly because it occurs traditionally at the beginning at the electoral year, before the New Hampshire primary, and also because not only regular activists, but also sympathizers, may take part in it.⁶

Lastly, it must be noted that the focus on primaries and caucuses has annoyed many states which are now trying to dispute the chronological precedence of the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary. To continue to be first, for instance, the New Hampshire primaries had to be moved forward to January 27 in 2004 and even to January 8 in 2008! The rush to organize primaries – or caucuses – as early as possible certainly changes the balance of the contest: with such an accelerated process, the gradual emergence of “outsiders” over several months has become less and less easy to achieve.

1.1.2 The tradition of elections for all public offices

As soon as the United States came into existence, when it broke away from British colonial rule, it became routine to hold elections for most major public offices: from the local sheriff, mayor or judge, to the president. Although a relatively new country, the United States was forced relatively early on to practice what might be called political communication: the obligation to use a minimum of public relations methods applied to politics in order to be chosen for any elected office. A strong executive branch, with the president elected by universal suffrage (although a two-step process), enhanced this tendency, because it created both a bond and an obligation to campaign.

Therefore, it is not surprising that, in the nineteenth century, as soon as railroad tracks were laid across the country, potential presidents got on board trains to meet their voters. Who does not recall Abraham Lincoln’s famous speeches delivered from the rear platform of the campaign train, scenes reconstructed in John Ford’s famous movie Young Mister Lincoln?

By the same token, the use of radio for political communication increased rapidly in the twentieth century. The first regular radio stations were founded in 1920, and as early as 1924, John W. Davis and Calvin Coolidge bought airtime in order to broadcast their speeches. The first political spots as we know them today appeared as early as 1928, sponsored by the Republican Party, while Democrat Governor and Senator Huey Long made extensive use of radio speeches as early as 1924.⁷ President Roosevelt’s well-known radio “Fireside Chats” were a natural part of this tradition of political PR: since he was directly elected by the citizens, he felt he owed them regular accounts of his acts, reaching an audience of more than 60 million listeners in the 1940s. But he was also concerned with measuring their efficiency and Roosevelt himself was the first president to commission public opinion polls on a regular basis to assess the evolution of his popularity.

This tradition of widespread political communication formed a very fertile ground for the development of modern political marketing in the United States. The over-consumption of political information in there is in fact partly a result of the increase in the number of primaries for local elections: already in 1917, primaries had been held for either local or national elections in all the states of the union but four. Nowadays, in many states, primaries are organized for the election of state governors and mayors of major cities, New York City being a case in point. These factors further increase opportunities for political marketing to develop: in 2010 the American Political Consultants Association had no fewer than 1,331 members, not counting those that were unaffiliated.⁸

1.1.3 The early development of modern media in the United States

The third element that fostered the expansion of modern political marketing was the rapid growth of modern media in the United States with regard to all the other democratic countries. In 1952, there was already a television set in nearly 40% of American homes. This figure rose to 60% in the northeastern states. In France, by comparison, the figure of half a million sets was not reached until 1957 (about 4%).

A related factor is the large degree of freedom in commercial advertising in all American media, a freedom that political marketing has always exploited to its advantage. This explains why the growth of American political marketing has always paralleled the evolution of the broadcast media, and particularly its use of commercial spots. Most other countries in the world, including the major democracies, heavily regulate political advertising, or even forbid it, which in turn has delayed the political use of audiovisual methods.

The same phenomenon occurred in the 1990s with the fast growth of Internet use in the United States, way before its expansion around the world. The Internet burst into the US presidential campaign in 1996 and its share of political communication has never ceased to grow.

1.2 The main stages in the evolution of political marketing in the United States

We will review these stages with special emphasis on the successive presidential elections. Of course, political marketing is not limited to them, as we have already mentioned, and more than one innovation first took place in local elections in one state or another. But the fact is that only when new methods of political communication are used during presidential elections, with their incomparable media visibility, do they really become a permanent addition to the tools of the trade.

We will also take a keener look at the use of audiovisual media, namely television, by the political parties, because these media are the most representative tools of modern American political marketing. Naturally, the evolution of political marketing in the United States is not limited to audiovisual media. For instance, direct marketing by mail was also used for the first time in the United States as early as 1952, when a mailing campaign was organized in order to help choose which issues Eisenhower’s campaign should focus on. When appropriate, we shall therefore also mention other innovations in political marketing in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the Internet in recent years.

1.2.1 Infancy: 1952–1960

1.2.1.1 1952: Instant success for Eisenhower and Nixon

The 1952 presidential election marks the start of modern political marketing in the United States. For the first time, the two main parties earmarked a special budget for political communication. To support General Eisenhower’s candidacy, the Republicans went so far as to enlist the services of the public relations firm BBDO (Batten, Barton, Durstin, and Osborne). They also hired one of the pioneers of audiovisual commercial marketing, Thomas Rosser Reeves Jr., at the time an employee of the Ted Bates Agency.

Access to television broadcasting at the time meant that politicians had to “buy back” television shows: United States media regulations allow politicians to preempt television time on any network, at any moment, the sole obligation being adequate financial compensation for the producers of the show which had been scheduled to be broadcast.

Both parties put together several long television broadcasts during which their candidates either addressed voters at length, or debated with other politicians who more or less cleverly played up the candidate’s image. But Reeves’ influence on the Republican campaign was essential: at his request, around 30 commercials were designed, identical in style to ones for consumer goods, a fact that a...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Series page
• Title page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Figures
• Tables
• Introduction
• Part I The rise of modern political communication
• Part II The foundations of modern political marketing
• Part III Political marketing tools
• Part IV The actual running of election campaigns
• Conclusion: how to use this book …
• Appendix 1: Memorandum of Understanding between the Bush and Kerry Campaigns for the 2004 Televised Debates (extract)
• Appendix 2: Internet “Final Rules” decided by the Federal Elections Commission, March 27, 2006
• Bibliography
• Index