Renee A. Prejean-Motanky is a writer and strategic marketing and communications management professional and consultant. Contact her directly at RAPWrites@aol.com.

Advice and Perspective

(Published March, 2004)

Does Public Relations Play an Important Role in Today’s Election Process?

By Renée A. Prejean-Motanky

A recent course of events illustrates the answer to this question in an obvious manner.

A progressive, Internet-driven, young middle class-centered, movement-like campaign such as Howard Dean’s – flush with money derived from unconventional sources, backed by significant sections of labor, reinforced by big name endorsements and surging with upward momentum – was derailed in a matter of weeks with the concerted effort of a PR campaign that was executed in its entirety through the media.

Dean was stripped of half his popular support in the space of two weeks in January while John Kerry – tied in the polls with Carol Moseley-Braun at seven percent only two months earlier – rose in a puff of smoke to become the overnight presidential frontrunner. This dizzying turn of fortune was nearly disorienting, and for good reason. Neither Howard Dean nor John Kerry did anything monumental that could have so dramatically altered the race. ¹

Howard Dean’s brilliant use of the Internet allowed him to capitalize on anti-war sentiment while assembling a funding base independent of the usual corporate powers. Dean’s surge took everyone by surprise. We observed that the media presented "one voice" to question Dean’s "electability." It is important to note that in mid-December, according to a Newsweek poll, Dean, Kerry and Clark were faring equally in a match-up with George Bush, at 40, 41, and 41 percent, respectively. There was no statistical basis to single out Dean as being unelectable. Dean had just received the endorsement of Al Gore and two of the nation’s most important labor unions, AFSCME and SEIU.

Suddenly negative impressions flooded Dean in a powerful wave, and didn’t let up even after the damage was complete. Dean was tagged by the media as a loser to Bush well before he let out "The Scream" – an innocuous, non-event, on the night of his Iowa defeat. ² Democratic voters, though still determined to be rid of George Bush, were afraid to support the "unelectable" Dean. Many turned to Kerry, who had polled at only 7 percent nationally, in November. These voters backed away from Dean because he had been pegged as a "scary" guy by the media.

Once again this should have illustrated for all, how Public Relations has been employed in the American political campaign structure to effect desired results. BUT the real question is…desired by whom? Face it! President George Bush who, in the eyes of many voters, should have been buried under a glacier of scandal and criminality within months of entering the White House, has received full-time protection of the media because of corporate public relations efforts.

Engaged in a continuous PR blitz, presidential campaign strategists always strive to portray their respective candidate as nearly perfect. Even obvious flaws are likely to be touted as signs of integrity or "human depth." Such spin encourages voters to confuse excellence with being preferable.

In the past year Americans have seen consciousness-shaking evidence of the employment of Public Affairs and PR gurus as members of huge political "think tanks" who have spun everything from 911 to the election of candidates to the War in Iraq. In response to a thoroughly thought out and executed campaign, for example, media rushed to "embed" themselves in the US war machine’s Iraq invasion where they were effectively "fed" the stories that were reported and, in fact, collaborated to actively communicate a view of the war that was decidedly mono-centric.

In the current campaign for President of the United States, the New York Times set the parameters of coverage by eliminating any mention of the three "bottom tier" candidates – starting with an "analysis" by their chief political reporter, of the May debate televised in South Carolina, a state in which Al Sharpton was a key player! Sharpton, Kucinich and Carol Moseley-Braun were consistently erased from weekly coverage of the contest, consistent with the objectives of powerful PR strategists and Public Opinion shapers. This strongly illustrates not only the role, but the increasing control of Public Relations over our political process.

General media consolidation has created an integrated mass communications system that is both objectively and self-consciously at one with the major corporate entities of the world. This powerful consortium recently acted in effective unison to give Dean the "boot" and hoist Kerry to the position of top political dog. The line separating "news" producers from larger corporate structures is disappearing with media conglomerates like Clear Channel.

Both as citizens and as Public Relations professionals many of us have actively campaigned against what we feel is a movement to eliminate all voices but one – which is what businessmen in boardrooms do as a matter of daily routine – not only to shield the public from dissenting opinions but to drastically diminish, distort and even erase such opinions. This is the most far reaching consequence of media consolidation.

So when asked if Public Relations plays an important role in today’s political process, my resounding answer is "YES!" But, engagement with the political process through means other than television and powerful mass media used to be far greater. Those institutions no longer serve as significant counter-weights to the strength of the Political Opinion Complex (POC) ³ where only certain opinion entities are allowed a voice.

List of References:

[Return to top.]

(Index to articles about monthly luncheons)