During the run up to the election we have heard a lot about Tory bank roller Lord Ashcroft’s tax status, however very little about the bankers who have made investments in the Conservative Party. There are the Goldman’s Sach’s bankers http://tiny.cc/norzb who are substantial donors, the former senior personnel at Lehman Brothers http://tiny.cc/3y27y who have been major contributors, and those bankers such as Henry Angest who have made targeted donations – funding environmentally unfriendly “Chopper” trips – in areas of Scotland http://tiny.cc/rkiay where he has a vested interest? There is also the donations from Conservative party treasurer Michael Spencer who has recently resigned to concentrate on the substantial issues http://tiny.cc/gm71o he has to address at the ICAP investment business http://tiny.cc/7q9ri , where he is currently Chief Executive?
The simple reality is that this is a potentially unpopular subject and one that could lead to very difficult questions about what form they expect their return on investment (ROI) to take. Such a close relationship with bankers, especially George Osbourne’s, could also be seen by the electorate as a potential obstacle to the successful progression
Tory Souls Being Pawned For Bankers Booty?
of banking legislation through the Commons and therefore a vote loser. Whatever the motivation for the donations the best strategic is to ensure that there are active strategies in place to deflect the public eye when it roves in that direction pre-election and use distraction (i.e. focus on Brown’s public spending record) post election.
So with whom does the responsibility for the development and execution of a communications strategy that is able to shift perceptions and create belief lie? This is not a job for the saccharin sweet public relations companies but for the strategic thinkers and brand strategists who are able to take a 360 degree view.
There have been one or two relatively sharp and vaguely inspiring poster treatments produced on behalf of the Conservatives during the current election campaign. There have also been some really banal pieces of poster copy produced in their name – think the “national service” treatment. Nothing approaching the fantastically spin friendly and eminently viral “New Labour New Danger” slogan, or the iconic “Labour is not working” has graced this campaign. This is somewhat surprising considering the creative talent at their disposal.
M & C Saatchi, recently joined the communications team and whilst they do not have the creative pedigree of the old Tory stalwarts Saatchi and Saatchi, now Publicis owned, this does not fully explain some of the platitudes that have been rolled out to masquerade as compelling advertising. So what are M & C Saatchi doing for the Tories?
Increasingly the role of communication companies, such as M & C Saatchi is to advise company boards about how their corporate responsibility policies should influence, and hopefully genuinely reflect, their marketing communications. This heighten profile has been driven by the need of communications companies to embed their services at strategic level – usually board level, in the hope that they render them indispensible, and by the needs of the companies themselves to develop partners who can advise them on reputation and market management in a world increasingly shaped by consumer perception of not just their products (aka brand) but how it is sourced and produced. This role means the communication strategy extends way beyond advertising and encapsulates PR and stealth viral strategies. Is this the type of advice M & C Saatchi is providing to the Conservatives party?
The presence of M & C Saatchi on the communications team is not surprising as Lord Saatchi is a member of the Conservative Foundation http://tiny.cc/t7s1s which was set up in March 2009 to endow the Conservative Party. He is a Tory loyalist. What may be surprising is how far they and their associates are influencing the Conservative party’s canvassing and positioning behaviour.
The invisible hand working the strings of the Tories 2010 campaign does not need an iron fist or velvet glove. This shadowy presence is a master of camouflage, obfuscation and subterfuge – the type of deception advertising agencies do so well. So what is the Conservative campaign strategy and how is it being communicated?
Beyond a core strategy that focuses on the fallout from the banking crisis and which is always translated into human and accessible terms (i.e. losing their jobs, families unable to buy same weekly shop), they have targeted key areas such as immigration, trust in politics, community ( and the dreadful “Big Society”), education and the family and are actively supporting these with neat boxed fresh soundbites. However the dominant theme of the Tory campaign is to do little to damage prospects and say less on contentious issues –
New World Order With Hung Tory?
avoiding the word austerity – and let “Labour hang themselves out to dry”. This is a dangerous strategy and may partly explain why the Conservative campaign has got off to such a slow start and could backfire.
In simple terms the economic crisis has given the Tories an opportunity to put their disasters of the last 13 years behind them. The fact that there appears to be tacit agreement between the party’s about not talking about economic policy in specific policy terms beyond the election, also works in the Conservative party’s favour. Their inexperience in Government cannot be fully exposed as the Labour Party can’t call on the previous 11 years of economic prosperity in order to show competency. Nor could Gordon Brown use his actions during the economic crisis, which demonstrated economic understanding (quantitative easing) and leadership on a global stage, as a point of reference as the UK was one of the slowest to emerge from recession because of dependency on banking.
This lack of focus on detail has had some strange effects. The Tories won’t be drawn on economic policy beyond banal rhetoric of a 5 year plan – which is not enhancing their brand profile – The Liberals say they can’t be specific beyond creating savings of £6.5 Billion until they see the figures, and Labour acts like an animal caught in the spotlight because they fully know the level of cuts which will be required. As the only party recommending maintenance of spend in 2010 Labour is also facing the difficulty that the election is being played out alongside the problems in Greece, where the consequences of overspending, and not tackling budget deficits, appears to be a key reason for their problems. So bar a few “immigration” and “effective government” clips there have been few significant soundbites and virtually no economic ones: which further reinforces the impression that this election campaign will be remember as low on detail and high on personality.
Unfortunately personality is not the Labour Gordon Brown’s leader strongest suit and make no mistake lack of charisma is a liability in the new rich media age. Gordon Brown’s TV debate performances did not enhance his image, however somewhat surprisingly he held his own and though eclipsed by Nick Clegg, importantly he was not by David Cameron – an outcome that the Conservatives and their spin agencies surely had not expected. The reluctance to discuss economic specifics, levels of immigration or scale of job cuts, left the viewing audiences dissatisfied and desperate for HOT (Honest, Openness, Truthful) answers to their questions. Brown was dogged in defence, Clegg got a boost for winning the beauty contest, Cameron just appeared slick and as stiff as a stick – replicating his PPB performance http://tiny.cc/pykuq.
It was no small surprise that beyond this point David Cameron’s “spin doctors” have had him in shirts and sweaters in an attempt to make him seem more approachable. The hope is this will make him seem a shade more like the average Briton, who is uncertain about his job and his own economic future, even if he is not. However, the well to do public school boy is a really hard one to shake, and this is a big problem for those trying to create an electable image for Mr cameron.
The time bomb for the Tories, and one which the consultants would wish to deflect until the last-minute or not have to deal with at all, is just how many of the Tories are ennobled or possessing sufficient wealth to a point that they will not be greatly worried by the coming cuts in services or increased taxes. Because the common man could not in all good conscience vote for a cabinet made up of these sorts of individuals, especially during the middle of an economic and social crisis their titles and wealth has been kept very quiet.
Andrew Neil asked George Young on the “The Daily Politics Election Debate” on the 5th May 2010, the following question: Sir George Samuel Knatchbull Young, 6th Baronet and old Etonian exactly why are you the right person to modernise 21st Century politics? which illustrates the potential difficulty of being seen as too upmarket. Add to this the shadow chancellor, “Georgie Porgey” Osbourne, whose real name is Gideon and is heir to the baronetcy of Ballentaylor, County Tipperary, Ireland. He has lived up to the title behaving like an upper class fop, lurching from one brand damaging scandal http://tiny.cc/6obpc to the next. His most recent mention in dispatches related to the expenses scandal, where he was reported as being implicated by the mortgaging flipping scandal http://tiny.cc/m0ukx . There are many others Tory’s with titles and fortunes, and deflecting the focus away from them has been key in order to show the party is not too removed from the real world, and that their retention of first past the post elections and the preservation of the House of Lords, is not just borne out of vested interest.
The silent and very rich minority
The other accusations that has not managed to penetrate the tabloid press – well the Daily Mirror – relate to the comparative inexperience of the Tory candidates, the number who have worked in the tainted (“morally bankrupt”) city and the numbers who spin as a day job – challenging the accusation that Labour is the party of spin. The FT though has calculate the relevant figures: ” The average age of the Tory candidates: 41.6; the number who have worked in local politics: 87; the number who have had jobs in the City or financial services: 48; the number who have worked in PR or lobbying: 26 http://tiny.cc/vq911 .
The issues that have reached the media and been successfully amplified have mainly been “user-generated” and anti-Labour. Brown’s “bigoted women” gaff was the most unfortunate. The way the audio clip was captured falls in line with a strategy of sitting back and waiting for opportunity. What is unsurprising about the incident is that the microphone belonged to Sky, whose owners are firmly on the Conservatives side, via ownership of “The Sun”. What would be interesting to know is where was the microphone placed, but probably what is most surprising is that Mr Brown’s car was not set up to block recording devices and bugging from outside.
Working on the principle “actions speak louder than words” then we should pay attention to where Cameron has gone in the last 24 hours, what he has done, and his final rhetoric as this will offer the best clue to what really represents the Conservative brand in 2010. We should also look to the media to see how well the Conservative spin strategy is being executed at this crucial moment.
- He has worked through the night – ala the “Iron Lady”
- Been seen in a fish and Chip shop – empathy with the working man.
- Visited Labour held Grimsby – indicating every seat is up for grabs and deflecting Labour attention from marginal’s.
- “Conservatives Party is working hard and taking nothing for granted” Cameron – rolling out of Protestant Work Ethic
- “How now Brown Cowell” – the X Factor’s Simon Cowell is emblazoned across the front cover of The Sun decrying Labour.
With just 24 hours till the new Government is formed polling cannot come soon enough for the Conservative party. Support is beginning to wilt under the pressure of scrutiny. People have started to review the central points; could the Conservatives manage the country for the next 5 years, do they have experience to resolve the economic crisis and what do they actually stand for in policy terms. The number of floating voters are symptomatic of a Conservative party that has not managed to convince the country through their rhetoric that they are authentic (brand essential) , credible and willing to collaborate with anyone who can resolve the UK’s current difficulties.
They have are also started to make their traditional mistakes. Hyperbole being one. Cameron’s “the elderly, frail, the vulnerable” quote sounded a hollow claim with labour still appearing to be the party of the NHS and Pensions. But much worse was Michael Gove on BBC Breakfast, whose quote about school and class sizes: “where the headteacher knows every child name and where we can ensure every child gets the education only the rich enjoy” felt platitudinous. His use of thirteen (13) in every sentence later in the same interview became tedious and eventually gave the impression everything he had said was trite.
Trying to be too clever being a second. The failed letter allegedly supported by business leaders decrying the increase in National Insurance supported implies they don’t have business community support, can’t achieve consensus and couldn’t organise a phone call in a Carphone Warehouse store. The use of Michael Caine, who appears as a hired hand who has forgotten his origins after becoming an ex-pat (even if he is not) and now has embedded wealth to protect.
It appears the softly, softly approach to campaigning adopted by the Conservatives, waiting for the Labour Party to condemn themselves and make mistakes, has inadvertently let in the Liberal Democrats. Crawling back the position has required a lot of hard work and the Conservatives this time cannot play the inexperience card, as it also applies to them, or challenge the Liberal Democrats economic positioning as the existing system has been universally condemned as broken; whether it actual is or not.
If the Conservatives don’t secure a majority they may look back at their strategy, review their roster of advisors and wonder why their branding has been so poor, their positioning so suspect and their delivery, Mr Cameron excepting, so uncertain and on occasion naive.
Mr Brown, dull and dour has been a gift. The economic crisis beneficial. The Brown bigot quote a lucky break. The pendulum effect was in full swing so what changed and what part of the bandwagon fell off? Poor branding and bad positioning are to blame, but most of all a suspect strategy and poor judgement has made it a very real possibility that the Tories can still grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
Advertising Pathology 