Mulcair’s behind the NDP rise

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Photo credit: Etienne Ranger, Le Droit)



 Alex Marland

Alex Marland (Memorial University) has published about political marketing in the Journal of Public Affairs, political talk radio in Media, Culture and Society, and about Newfoundland nationalism in the International Journal of Canadian Studies.

Ever think about how much goes on in your mind before before you buy something for the first time? You need to hear about it, you need to have a problem that needs solving, you need to prioritize one option over others, you need to make a decision, and once you’ve made a purchase you assess the quality of the product/service while you are using it. Marketers know this and use models of cognition theory and behavioural decisions to figure out how to get you to buy their product.

The same thing happens in politics. And currently commentators seem to be attributing the NDP’s stunning rise in Quebec to Jack Layton. I get this: Layton scores well in leadership polls, did well in the French debate, and was even born and raised in Quebec. But someone else is very much responsible.

Thomas Mulcair.

From a marketing perspective, the party’s lone Quebec MP deserves much of the credit for many Quebeckers currently toying with the idea of voting NDP. This is because he softened the ground as the marketing equivalent of a ‘product trial’. For years, Quebeckers have heard about the NDP, but it wasn’t seen to be able to solve their needs. They had no reason to prioritize it over other parties, and so voting NDP wasn’t a serious consideration.

Since winning a 2007 by-election, Mulcair has been the party’s regional salesman in Quebec, a position augmented by his role as a deputy NDP leader. He has represented Outremont capably and offers Quebec a credible voice in Parliament. A CROP poll in early April predicted he would comfortably hold off a challenge from former Liberal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon – and that was before the New Democratic Party’s province-wide rise.

In other words, Mulcair’s presence means that for the past few years more Quebeckers have been slowly evaluating the NDP, whether they knew it or not. When a number of them recently sensed that voting for other parties, notably the Bloc Québécois, would not fulfill their needs, the combination of Layton and Mulcair meant that the NDP emerged as a better option. Or at least one worth considering.

For all that, I wonder whether this dalliance will materialize on Election Day. Thierry Giasson is also hesitant, comparing the situation to Quebeckers considering a pricy cashmere sweater, who may not go through with the sale. One of my hesitations? Throughout the campaign I have been reading about too many phantom NDP candidates in Quebec. They do not have a sufficient local presence to turn survey intentions into quite the same proportion of hard votes. The Liberal party is mentioning as much in its "Not so fast, Jack" advertising.

Still, just as some Canadians are now looking at how the parties are using marketing techniques such as micro-targeting, we can use a marketing way of thinking to make a case for the NDP to give Thomas Mulcair a big pat on the back.

After May 2, of course.

Stephen Harper’s been pinned

 
Photo source: www.zimbio.com/Stephen+Harper/articles/14/Stephen+Harper+Wins+Election+Refuses+Wear

 

Alex Marland

Alex Marland (Memorial University) has published about political marketing in the Journal of Public Affairs, political talk radio in Media, Culture and Society, and about Newfoundland nationalism in the International Journal of Canadian Studies.

Pierre Trudeau famously sported a rose in his lapel. Sometimes politicians wear political ribbons. Women often wear broaches. Stephen Harper? He wears a Canadian flag pin. Look closely: it’s there. You probably didn’t notice it before, but you will now. The book cover of Harperland is a good example.

What does this little piece of metal symbolize? The Harper brand. At least, the brand of Harper that his handlers are trying to convey. Specifically, that Stephen Harper is a patriotic Canadian. His flag pin is a subtle reminder that only he stands up for Canadian values. Or, at least, the version of Canadian values that the Harper Conservatives value.

Here are some of the many ways that the Conservatives try to position the party and their leader as defenders of the Canadian way of life:

• Stephen Harper is regularly surrounded by Canadian flags. Jean Chrétien was a pro at this. The flag is now so entwined in Conservative images that they appear to be on a mission to edge out the Liberal party' brand as the foremost choice for national unity;
• Conservative policies support the Canadian military and thereby 'support the troops' and they feature a defence of Canadian sovereignty including the Arctic;
• Harper spends time at Tim Hortons coffee shops, a business whose own marketing has branded itself with Canadian identity;
• He hangs out at Canadian sporting events such as curling, the Calgary Stampede, CFL games and of course hockey and the Vancouver Olympics;
• His ties often include the colour red and during the campaign Harper has been wearing a jacket emblazoned with “CANADA”; and,
• The Conservative party campaign slogan is strategically titled, "Here For Canada", their platform document features a Canadian flag, and their newest TV ads are full of Canadian iconography.

This nationalist positioning is really only a Conservative party strength if it is a corresponding weakness for the Liberal party. So Conservative advertising positions Harper’s main adversary as someone who ‘came back’ and is ‘just visiting’. In contrast, Harper quietly works at his office desk with the Canadian flag positioned behind him. His handlers have used flags for a long time, but not the flag pin. It wasn’t there in the 2005-06 campaign; that’s when promoting his young family was a good way to contrast with an older Paul Martin. But the Harper flag pin was prominent during the 2008 coalition crisis when he was defending national unity, for instance.

Sure, nationalism is prevalent in all elections, and not just in Canada. Flags are the most common way to convey this. They are present at protests, at leaders’ summits and at sporting events. Different ones are used depending on the audience, especially where Quebec's concerned. In Newfoundland, where I’m writing from, there are people who do not vote who have branded themselves with a tattoo of the Newfoundland independence flag which symbolizes their political identity. Flag tattoos are common elsewhere too. Maybe our PM even has one.

I would say he does – it just happens to be a highly symbolic piece of metal on his lapel.

(Incidentally NDP advertising is noticeably wrapping Jack Layton in the Canadian flag. So does the Bloc Quebecois with Gilles Duceppe... just a flag with slightly different symbolism)

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

Why Stephen kisses Laureen

 
(Photo credit: Chris Wattie, Reuters. Source: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/thewest/Harper+goes+Bollywood/4585024/story.html)

Alex Marland

Alex Marland (Memorial University) has published about political marketing in the Journal of Public Affairs, political talk radio in Media, Culture and Society, and about Newfoundland nationalism in the International Journal of Canadian Studies.

Did you see Laureen Harper’s Bollywood dance? Have you noticed that from the outset of the campaign that Stephen and Laureen Harper have been spending a lot of time together publicly? That she is present at photo ops? That they often kiss publicly?

There is more to this than celebrity-style gossip. Commenting on Mrs. Harper’s presence does not mean entering the private lives of our politicians, which tends to be out of bounds in Canadian political discourse. No, there is something strategic at play here, and it’s nothing sinister. Rather, Conservative strategists have put their fingers on something that works.

Like many leaders Stephen Harper has long had an image problem. He has lots of strengths, but shoring up his weaknesses is the job of image managers, who will tell you that you can only package the product you have. In other words, you have to work with what you’ve got.

In Mr. Harper’s case his wife seems to be the ying to his yang insofar as public images are concerned. He is cold, she is warm; he is aloof, she is outgoing; he is media-shy, she is media-friendly; he is partisan, she is apolitical. Including Mrs. Harper in photo-ops nicely addresses so many needs:

• she is photogenic and so refreshingly human in such a scripted bubble-like media environment;
• she likely resonates with female voters, whom have long been an Achilles heel of Stephen Harper and the conservative/individualistic ideology generally;
• unlike her husband, she probably does not generate anger among any segments of the electorate, even those who are fearful of a Conservative majority government;
• she has fans among Liberal and NDP politicos (maybe Bloc too, but I can’t be sure);
• she is widely liked amongst the press corps, whom have had an antagonistic relationship with her husband;
• she projects a First Lady status, which makes Stephen Harper seem more presidential, but does so in a Michelle Obama way rather than a Mila Mulroney manner;
• she plays well with the Conservative party faithful, especially when the Harpers’ children are included in photo-ops which communicates that compared with the other party leaders only they represent family values and concerns;
• she is a sharp contrast to Michael Ignatieff’s wife, Zsuzsanna Zsohar, whose presence could potentially add to Mr. Ignatieff’s image weaknesses of elitism and of ‘just visiting’ Canada; and
• Laureen Harper is a subtle reminder to Canadians concerned about Stephen Harper’s concentration of power that, like Aline Chrétien was with Jean Chrétien, she is likely a sharp political mind who is a good sounding board for the prime minister.

All of this is related to something called celebrity transfer. That is, when a celebrity endorses someone or something, the recipient becomes associated with the characteristics of that celebrity. It’s why athletes and Hollywood types are paid big bucks to endorse products – we think the products are better and thus are more likely to buy them. And it’s why politicians fall over opportunities to hobnob with celebrities. Think Paul Martin and Bono.

Laureen Harper has pep. The media seem to love her. She is a marketer’s dream. And in a world where personality politics often trumps policy, the Conservatives are rightly engaging one of their biggest assets in this campaign.

(Note: Perhaps a case could be made for Jack Layton and Olivia Chow, but it is my impression that they are not campaigning together the way that they did in past campaigns)