The TV debates. (9) Choose the right tie.

The dry-run of the also-rans, Ask the Chancellors, took place last week. As anticipated it was dull and dreary. The equivalent of the ‘procurement police’ saw to that with a strictly observed 76-point code, answers time-limited, and the audience banned from clapping or jeering, not that there was much to provoke either.

fathers_day_059_02_tnb

AA Gill, in typically ascerbic mode, said that “In the end it was all about the tie. As much time will have gone in getting the look right as the content. The look is as important as anything they have to say. They know the voters won’t be able to differentiate between them”.

Our three PM reality show contenders know this. They are well aware of the Nixon factor and are preparing accordingly with numerous coaches and advisers focusing in on look, style and tone of performance.

In one guise or another they each have a “saatchi” (see last post) to stiffen up their attitude. They each have wives, all of whom would be more attractive performers in this male-dominated show, to advise on how to make the emotional connection.

Certainly two have called in people who did it for Obama. One gives lessons on “how to sit, how to stand, how to gesture, how to pause”. Another, helping intonation, gets his pupil to say a seven word sentence seven times, each time emphasising a different word. Imagine Gordon practising …..

All this effort may seem faintly ridiculous as a way of deciding our future but the fact is most close pitch decisions, political or business, come down to “A sort of gut instinct. A feeling. It’s not what you say, it’s what you look like saying it”.

Who will chose the ties? After the negative reactions to Sam’s dressed down Dave and Sarah’s casual Gordie, it will probably be the focus groups.

Leave a reply

The TV debates. (8) The Saatchi factor.

But which variant?

The one and only genuine “original” is no more. That was the one where one relatively small agency was inspired by the talents of Maurice (now a peer of the realm) Charles (artoholic and author) Tim Bell (also a peer) and Martin Sorrell (a knight and tv pundit).

SINGLEMINDED

It was an agency whose compelling creative work was always rooted in a singleminded proposition. This was at the heart of a poster that only appeared on a dozen sites and yet remains the most talked about, most influential political advertisement ever. “Labour isn’t working”.

This is the magic dust David Cameron is wishing for with his late call to M&C Saatchi, hoping that their approach of “brutal simplicity” will give him a much needed boost pre-debates (and election)

BRUTAL SIMPLICITY

The posters are certainly brutal. They reinforce an aspect of Cameron which is already strong, his Brown-attack mode. They wont up his charm quotient where he is increasingly reliant on GlamSam and now MamSam, (so lucky that the vampish pictures were discovered in that attic before the pregnant ones).

Saatchi & Saatchi have an even tougher task with Gordon. They describe themselves as The Lovemarks company creating emotional connections with consumers/voters. The difficulty they face is that the product is too often exposed in a not altogether lovable way.

LOVEMARKS

The appearance on the Piers Morgan show did more than any ad campaign could to make him a little more lovable but in reality it is Sarah who is the lovemark, making the emotional connection for ‘my husband, my hero’. If she could introduce him at the debates his confidence would soar and the lovable, or is it loved, Gordon might shine.

Probably at this stage the most any poster can do, like Sarah, is make Gordon feel better about himself.

Nick Clegg, rumoured to have an ex-Saatchi luminary behind the scenes, is doing okay and will probably shade the debates without any advertising support. If he wants some, he need look no further than Team Saatchi. Conceived by “original” Saatchi, and born during the painful divorce, the agency has thrived.

BIG IDEAS

In a recent survey of clients, Team Saatchi came top (alongside Saatchi & Saatchi, with M&C fourth) and their positioning as “The boutique agency that delivers big ideas” seems spot on for Clegg. He has an easy performance manner, unlike his rivals, but a few more big ideas would not go amiss.

Leave a reply

The TV debate. (7) Beware vampires!

As the debates draw near, all three of the so-called secret weapons are mounting a full frontal attack. The front cover of Private Eye, in a nice parody of Reader’s Wives, shows all three strutting their stuff, Saucy Sarah, Sexy Sam and The Other One.

cropped-sarah-and-sam2

Each has raised their game this week. A two pager in ES magazine eulogising Sarah Brown describes her as ‘ the most formidable Prime Minister’s wife in living memory’. Not to be outdone ‘vampish GlamCam’ sprawls seductively across pages of the MoS, Mail and Telegraph in a twelve year old fashion shoot conveniently ‘discovered’ in an attic.

Even the stylish Myriam Gonzalez, who backs her husband Clegg in a ‘middling sort of way’, has succumbed to appearing on television where she warns of the danger of a candidate’s wife putting together “a sugar-coated image of yourself , in the hope that it brings you votes.”

She makes a good point. But for the candidates there is a bigger danger. They are all making one of the commonest mistakes made in any presentation where the stakes are high. It’s the one where props created to aid communication become crutches that distract. Often dubbed “vampire visuals”.

56_vampires

Right now vampires in books, movies and television programmes are enjoying popularity our candidates can only dream of. The same goes for these political vampires.

And we know what vampires do to their mates………

Leave a reply

The TV debate.(6) Pause for thought

As the debates draw ever closer, the Political WAGs are rolling up their sleeves for the SamCam(!) versus Sarah(my hero Gordon) show with only Mrs Clegg having the good grace to spare us more Jordan style intimacy.

jordan-and-sam-cam-pic-swns-getty-326575773

Unfortunately for ‘Dave’ and Gordon they have to stand on their own feet in front of the cameras, presumably well rehearsed and probably bolstered by their experience of handling the cut and thrust of Prime Minister’s question time. Easy compared to the over-regulated debate?

Perhaps not. In trying to prove themselves with their grasp of policy and desparate to score points over their rivals in front of the viewing millions they run the risk of being seen to try too hard, being too clever and too rushed.

What can be seen as witty and wounding in Question time will be seen as less than likeable in this civilised debate. It will also look less than confident.

In any pitch, when adrenaline is high, one of the things that undermines the appearance of confidence is rushing to get started, to move from one point to the next, to reply to a question.

coca-cola_art_pause2

The solution is simple. Pause. Pause. Pause and you will look confident. Pause for thought.

Recent television appearances indicate that Clegg who has naturally easy body language has the confidence to pause and to look like a leader. Still my tip for winner in the debates.

Leave a reply

The TV debate.(5) Where looks can kill.

if_looks_could_kill1

We now know that the debates will take place in three English cities, upsetting the Welsh and Scots, and that they will be termed “Prime Ministerial”, pleasing Nick Clegg. We also know that some 76 protocols are in place to ensure no-one gets an unfair advantage.

As Dominic Lawson put it, “the effect is to ensure that the entire affair will be characterised by a depressing combination of rigidity and superficiality”. The approach is lifted from America where even Obama in his clash with McCain was “rendered soporifically dull by the rigid entirely unspontaneous format.”

What will this mean for our three contestants? Well rehearsed and prepared, as they each will be, to deliver their prepared statements, debate for a minute or so, and reply to planted questions, the chances of any competitive advantage from what they say, the policy content, are zero.

So, we will be left with judgement based almost entirely on looks. “Do we like this person?”

All the non-verbal clues will be in play. Tone of voice, gestures, facial expression, genuine warmth, natural smile, ease of body language, eye contact, all the normal signals of a confident personality but all under threat from the television camera.

caught-on-camera1

David Cameron has the toughest job. Once the ‘charismatic telegenic’ performer his aura is diminished along with the Incredible Shrinking Man (Gerald Scarfe cartoon) polling figures. As the still just-favourite he has most to lose and the temptation will be to try too hard. He needs the confidence to relax and take cues from Bill Clinton at his charming best.

As the least exposed and with no real form, Nick Clegg should go in with confidence high, certain that his freshness will give him an edge. We have little idea of what he stands for so anything he says will seem original. He can, and should come across as the one enjoying himself, so we might enjoy him.

Gordon Brown as ever is unpredictable. Recently his public preparation is the best. The Piers Morgan show and then 4 hours of Iraq enquiry will have fuelled confidence in his newly found ‘nice Gordon’ persona. If he can combine the nice with the formidable authority, lacking in both his fresh-faced, ‘inexperienced’ opponents, the debates will favour him.

However, for all the protocols and the preparation it would be unfortunate, as Lawson said,” if a close British general election were to be decided by a single cleverly worded put down or an unfortunate behavioral twitch on camera.” But it could be.

Leave a reply