Energy. The deciding factor?

It has been a war of attrition and we still don’t know who will win and when we do, will it have been down to campaign strategies, tv debate performances, personalities or policies? Or will it be down to energy? Who has more of it? Who has managed it better?  Who has made it work for them?

new-image-energy1

Brown has it. As Tom Bower wrote in the Observer:

“His indomitable energy during the final days of the campaign sabotaged an Old Etonian’s assumption of a graceful drive to the Palace after winning an overall majority”

Cameron also has it but now needs it more than ever. Peter Osborne in the Sunday Times:

“Sleepless, dog-tired and under immense pressure, David Cameron is being forced to compress a series of life-defining decisions into 48 hours. They will determine not only his political future, but the future of the Conservative party and of Britain.”

The reality in numerous competitive pitches is that the winners are those who sustain and manage their energy best. David Cameron supporters will be crossing their fingers that he keeps on flying!

red_bull_wings-300x198

 ‘Managing Energy’ is the subject of a Best Practice Guide. (see listing on right).

Leave a reply

TV DEBATES: THE VERDICT

And finally a review of ten factors critical to pitch success and who handled them best.

1. Mastery of content

Agree with their policies or not you have to admire the levels of preparation from all three. All were impressively fluent in articulating their policies, responding to anticipated but genuine questions and then entering debate, albeit restricted. A draw.

2.Strong opening

The first, history-making, debate was ‘made’ by Clegg’s powerful opening. With the element of surprise on his side, his ease in front of the camera and his clever opening statement he set out his different positioning and paved the way for his successful performance.

3.Eye contact

It may not be fair but some people, and Clegg is one of them, are naturals in front of the camera so we the viewers ‘got’ the eye contact and this gave him the visceral connection, and thus the levels of preference.

three-eyes

4.Body language.

In the first debates but less so later Clegg’s easier and more open relaxed body language added to his likeability. Brown’s relentless punching for emphasis was not attractive. Cameron’s strong gestures became less aggressive . 

5. Humour.

Best advice is not to tell jokes, unless you are a comedian. Brown isn’t. All three were light on showing even a slight sense of humour. The debates were heavygoing. (The temptation to switch over to Have I Got News For You proved too much at one point)

6. Gaffe avoidance

To the bitter disappointment of the media, and most viewers, there was no Richard Nixon moment, if you discount Alastair Stewart’s rather odd shouting in the first debate. (Dimbleby easily won best moderator). Thankfully, good sport Gordon made up for lack of gaffe with Mrs Duffy.

y183739410346157

7. Rebuttals and answers

Clegg’s actual answers to the audience were no better than the others. But he really looked as if he was listening and more consciously used the names, so we believed his answers were better. Cameron was stronger when real debate got going in the final session.

8. Pause power.

All three suffered from trying to squeeze too many words in to beat the clock and to show off their grasp of policy. Generally, Clegg resisted this pressure better and used the pause to great effect. By saying less he communicated more.

9. Likability

Brown not surprisingly speaks out at the way personalities are becoming more important than policies.  Well personality has always been important. What is now different is the importance of the ‘televisual’ personality. Regan had that. So does Schwartzenegger. So like it or not does Clegg.

10.Energy.

In the ‘world’s best selling book’ by Paul Arden is this quote: “ENERGY. It’s 75% of the job. If you haven’t got it be nice”. Clegg may have come across nicer, but Cameron won on the all important energy front. And here is a quote from William Blake.

  Energy_square new for web.qxd

Leave a reply

When words are not enough!

The second of the debates confirmed they are here to stay and that they have changed forever old-style political campaigning.  Although all three are stomping  the country, wives in hand (Brown and Cameron), speaking in this photogenic ward, or school or factory, the impact of these staged news events is diminished. 

Newspapers are finding it hard to cope with this marginalising of their role. Their forte has been the ‘forensic’ dissection of the prepared speeches, reporting, and embellishing, to  the whim of their editors/publishers. Assessments of debates that we have all seen, and judged already, can make them look stupid. Take these two headlines on Friday morning.

img00018-20100423-17254

It is not just political bias that is the issue.  It is the nature of these live debates and the way we the viewers are responding to them.  The papers are devoting acres of newsprint to tell us their views on how the candidates did. Who said precisely what on this, that or the other policy. Who said it right. Who said it wrong.

 The trouble is we have already decided who won and we are not deciding on who said what and on the content in isolation.

very-best-cake

If we were responding to the words on their own  Cameron could well be winning.  And on radio Brown, who has a reassuring warm tone, could be ahead. (As was Nixon against Kennedy). Unfortunately for both it is Clegg  who “by force of his televisual appeal is making political realignment a genuine possibility.”(Times) 

 However hard they try Cameron and Brown cannot as Clegg does “look directly into the camera and connect viscerally to people’s desires.” (MOS)

Instead, what they both do is talk at rather than talk to the voters. Not so appealing!

Leave a reply

Lessons from Nick Clegg.

Many, including me, tipped Nick Clegg to win the debate. After all, as the ousider with less to lose and the fresher face he had everything going for him. None however anticipated the scale of his victory which was down to performance not policies.

There are many things he got right in front of the cameras  but two in particular stand out and are pointers to all who pitch or interview. 

prince-charming-leading-men-of-disney-6173661-863-536

1.Be charming

All three no doubt can be charming company but only Clegg charmed on air. He resisted the temptation to say too much under pressure of the clock, he did not rush to answer as if in a race, he paused to think, he listened-and was seen to listen- to questioners whose names he remembered.

He, more than his rivals, realised that in this debate viewers would not find it easy to take in, let alone evaluate, the content. So less worried about what to say, he made certain that we liked the way he said it. His relaxed body language and his easy eye contact with the camera/viewer set him apart.

” Nonchalantly hands in his pockets and with his humanity beautifully rehearsed and turned up to the max”. This is how the MoS summed it up.

2. A great opening.

Clegg  made that old adage work for him, ‘You never get a second chance to make a first impression.’   He knew that a strong opening not only gets the audience on side it makes you feel good, boosting your confidence from word go. It worked and put the others on the back foot.

first-impressions

A cleverly worded opener, which he wrote himself, positioned him as if above his squabbling rivals. “Don’t let anyone tell you that the only choice is the old politics.  We can do something different this time.”

From the start his words and his manner, calm, fresh and engaging meant he came across as different and better. Not a bad outcome which must have pleased John Starkey his campaign director. When at Saatchi his mantra for assessing communication was how is it different, how is it better?

Leave a reply

The TV debates. (10) Be yourself!

 This is the tenth and final lesson for our plucky contestants as they face up to the three-part reality show series starting on Thursday.  It may be stating the obvious but being yourself can easily get lost in the deluge of  ‘debate-prep’,  the  dry-run rehearsals and the  gaggle of Obama consultants.

Imagine absorbing advice from someone who:

“Showed Obama how to look smart without looking smug, how to look compassionate without being condescending, how to shed the appearance of being self-involved and arrogant and how to knit his brows and look as if he was concentrating intently as a  question was asked before changing his facial expression and relaxing the slight frown into a smile as he came up with the answer”.

press-cartoon-mona-lisa1

Then imagine endless rehearsals in front of cameras with, for example Alistair Cambell  playing the part of David Cameron or a Jeremy Hunt, rumoured to be better than the real thing, playing the part of Nick Clegg.

Then imagine the ‘relentless revision’ on argument, counter argument and rebuff all against the research-led concept of not merely having to perform well against your rivals but  having to perform against expectations. Cameron apparently will be judged by a higher standard than his fellow debators.

Then throw in the nerves that will be jangling, even for these well prepared and seasoned tv performers, as they  meet in open combat for the first time and where one slip-up can lead to the fatal thumbs down from the baying viewers.  Now try being yourself.gladiators1

Yet this is what will count. Not the words but the ease and the naturalness of the body language.  As veteran American broadcaster Jim Lehrer said in the Observer:

 “A person is a person is a person.  You are who you are and that comes out in debates.”

Leave a reply