Why many presidential candidates are doomed to failure

Why many presidential candidates are doomed to failure

Ong Hock Chuan
Partner
PT Maverick Solusi Komunikasi
Jakarta

The good news in the 2004 presidential elections is that many
politicians have woken up to the fact that they have to be more
savvy in managing their public image because Indonesia is, in
spite of all its imperfections, a thriving democracy where public
opinion matters.

As a result, politicians have been busily inviting public
relations consultants to pitch for handling their campaign
communications. The more forward-thinking ones have already
appointed their image gurus.

The bad news, however, is that very few of them will be
successful in translating their realization of the need for a
modern, sophisticated electoral campaign into reality. As a
result, all they will have achieved once the final votes have
been tallied is a humiliating electoral defeat and a huge hole in
their considerable wallets.

There are many reasons that contribute to an ineffective
electoral campaign but my experience has been that the main one
is because these politicians are surrounded by unprofessional
aides and advisors, who are not as interested in seeing their
leader win as in lining their own pockets.

For instance, a public relations consultancy I know of was
recently appointed by a very prominent politician to help him
spruce up his image. The politician was extraordinary because he
was honest about his own shortcomings. He knew that he came
across as lackluster because of a very poor public speaking
style. He wanted to improve himself and his electoral chances by
being coached on a more effective style of delivery.

Like most people in his position, he left it to his advisors
to appoint the consultancy and work out the financial
arrangements. They, of course, asked for hefty commissions. One
of the advisors was his own close relative but even he was
looking out for Number One instead of his boss.

Up close, the consultants observed that it was a hopeless
situation. His advisors were constantly making recommendations to
him of measures ostensibly to benefit him but in reality to line
their pockets. Thus, several hagiographic pieces were published
about him that were badly written and presented in such a way as
to contain not a shred of credibility. In spite of this, however,
thousands of copies of the books were printed and handed out free
to all and sundry.

His relative owned an "advertising agency" that makes its
money producing banners and designing and placing newspaper
advertisements. So guess what his recommendations to improve the
politician's image consisted of?

With money being the driving factor, such communications
campaigns are usually devoid of strategy but full of banners,
advertisements, posters and other collateral that send out mixed
messages.

If politicians are serious about mounting an effective
electoral campaign they should take their communications
seriously. They should not allow their dubious underlings to
advise and handle the campaign communications. They should roll
up their sleeves and find a communications advisor themselves.

If they are lucky enough to find one that knows what he or she
is doing then they should treat them as a partner and listen to
their advice closely. British Prime Minister Tony Blair's working
relationship with his communications director, Alistair Campbell,
for example, took him to Downing Street and helped him win the
hearts and minds of many Britons.

Communications advisors worth their salt will set about
bringing focus to the campaign. The problem with the campaigns of
many politicians is that they lack focus. As a result, no one is
really sure what they stand for or what their vision for the
country might be. In moments of confusion, as in Indonesia,
people want to see a leader, someone with vision, someone who can
take charge, someone who inspires confidence and trust.

It may sound Machiavellian, but a good public relations
practitioner can go a long way to helping create the perception
of such attributes in a politician, provided that the politician
is willing to listen and act on the advice. But while the public
relations person can help package politicians, they are still
limited by two major factors: Time, and the caliber of the
candidates themselves.

As to the former, no matter how brilliant the campaign
communications strategy might be, it takes time to build an
image. Some things cannot be hurried or they begin to ring
hollow. Presidential candidate Amien Rais, for example, gets full
marks for trying to build his appeal to a younger audience, but
hanging out with Slank and singing one of their songs? Eek!

As to the latter, the plain truth is that many of the
presidential candidates are made of poor stuff. At best they are
devoid of charisma; at worst they are not even likable. No amount
of image massaging and packaging is going to help them. The best
thing is for them to stare truth in the face and save themselves
a lot of angst and money by withdrawing gracefully.

Refusal would mean resorting to spin doctoring which, as any
respectable PR practitioner will attest to, is the last resort of
the desperate trying to sell the unsellable. It convinces no one
and simply gives the remaining communications consultants a bad
name.

Maverick is a PR consultancy specializing in issues and crisis
management as well as brand strategy.