The Problem in Messaging in 21st Century Communications

By Jack Keen

This evening, I find myself reflecting on the last few prime ministers. It is easy to point to different failures or different weaknesses in personality and political fibre. But fundamentally, moderate world leaders have failed to do one thing. Communicate.

Communication in the new era of modern technology is vital to our politics. No matter how good your policies are, perceptions can be different.

Politicians look to other politicians for inspiration on this. Often to ones that ‘do it well’ - Zohran Mamdani, Gavin Newsom, or even a lower-level politician such as Warwickshire Councillor Sam Jones. That ‘Perhaps by emulating their style, I can get just as much engagement’. And every pundit keeps coming back to one thing, voters crave: authenticity. So, we might see politicians do walking shots, drop in some swears, or even start a podcast. Often employing common social media tips and tricks. Flashy words, quick cuts, and content hooks that help boost engagement.

And yet, it all rings hollow. Why?

Delivery and the message are two vastly different things. No number of delivery strategies will change whether the message resonates with people. The message must be right, and then delivery methods can go the last mile. Without the correct message, no amount of delivery strategies can make voters connect.

So, what is the right message?

Reform, Restore, and the Greens are building a message of fear, hatred and blame.

Blame immigrants for cultural decline.

Blame the ultra-wealthy for economic decline.

Blame wokism for social decline.

What is missing? – Hope.

Positive messaging always beats negative messaging. 

Look to Obama – “Yes we can”, or Zohran Mamdani - “Afford to Dream”, or Tony Blair - “New Labour, New Britain”. They all rode a wave of hope. One that got people positively excited about politics. They inspired voters to engage instead of giving in to apathy and cynicism.

Not rocking the boat will also mean not moving polls anywhere.

Take the Obama example. He built an optimistic atmosphere by building a political mythology. His 2004 DNC speech is an iconic example. Obama describes his family roots, from a small Kenyan village, through to his upbringing in Hawaii and his education in the US. But after he describes his journey, he begins speaking about ideals. He recognises that he is part of the “larger American story”, and that democracy, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are factors they all share in common. “There is not a liberal America, or conservative America – there is the United States of America”.

Obama tells us his roots, his ideals, and then sets out an idyllic view of what America should be. A United States of America. He gets voters excited by setting out a vision of what the nation should be. Paired with the powerful slogan “Yes we can”, he reminds citizens that yes, we can achieve that dream. Ultimately, he won the election despite being far from a frontrunner.

We should also understand that risk-taking is a core part of building a message. Not rocking the boat will also mean not moving polls anywhere. If we are serious about moving from mediocrity and fixing problems, then settling for a halfway house is not going to work. Build a vision, be bold in what that vision is, and if it upsets some people along the way? Good. Risk-taking is responded to well by voters. They appreciate that sometimes, the biggest issues require the boldest responses, and they reward politicians for it. At the very least, by taking a risk, we set ourselves apart from the crowd of the risk-averse and can lead them to a better destination.

So, we should learn from the mistakes of our predecessors. By all means, politicians should talk about their past and talk about who they are. But also talk about where we are going. Inspire us to create. Get people to buy into a vision. Make it idyllic. Make it impossible. Make it bold. 

The people, after years of enduring negativity and mediocrity, might just give bold hope a chance.

Image: PxHere