Mike Paranoia Pays
by Graham Davies
Yesterday, Gordon Brown gave a Master Class in microphone-awareness. Or whatever the opposite of a Master Class is. Not realising that he was still wearing a live lapel mike, he described someone as a "bigoted woman"....when her views were merely different to his rather than bigoted.
It is always a disaster for a politician to be caught saying something in "private" that contradicts their public persona. It confirms the pre-conception that we all have of them being two-faced.
But all presenters can learn something from this: always assume that the mike is on.......and make sure that you get rid of the damn thing as soon as you have finished what you have finished doing what you put it on for.
There are a host of (probably apochryphal) stories about the sound of presenters' bodily functions being transmitted by mikes that were unexpectedly still switched on. This morning, I am certain that Gordon Brown wishes we had just heard him having a crap.
Thursday, 29 April 2010
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
The Leader's Debate
by Graham Davies
Just to be sporting, I have decided to give advice to all 3 Leaders for the first televised debate:
1. Have alot of pre-prepared funny one-liners rehearsed and available at the tip of your tongue. This includes YOU, Gordon. These are the words that TV audiences like to hear and journalists like to report. A good gag at the expense of the other 2 candidates will get you more votes than a list of cost estimates.
2. Avoid sloganising: as a device, it only works in front of a crowd of your own supporters. Don't follow the example og George Osborne, who says We Are All In This Together whenever he can'y think of anything else.
3. Be as specific as posssible when you do talk about the amount and location of cuts. The sort of audience that is going to listen for 90 minutes will not want want their stamina rewarded with vagueness.
4. Don't practice gestures. If you think that your likely voters are concerned about where your arms are, you have been woking wiath an unrelistic (probably American) coach.
5. Don't touch the lectern. By all means use it as a place to write and perch notes.....but the white-knuckle death-grip is never inspiring. Speak and move as though the lectern simply doesn't exist.
In the USA, the generally percieved winner of the Presidential Debates has always gone on to win the Presidency. Here, Cameron's Premiership will be confirmed in the same way.
by Graham Davies
Just to be sporting, I have decided to give advice to all 3 Leaders for the first televised debate:
1. Have alot of pre-prepared funny one-liners rehearsed and available at the tip of your tongue. This includes YOU, Gordon. These are the words that TV audiences like to hear and journalists like to report. A good gag at the expense of the other 2 candidates will get you more votes than a list of cost estimates.
2. Avoid sloganising: as a device, it only works in front of a crowd of your own supporters. Don't follow the example og George Osborne, who says We Are All In This Together whenever he can'y think of anything else.
3. Be as specific as posssible when you do talk about the amount and location of cuts. The sort of audience that is going to listen for 90 minutes will not want want their stamina rewarded with vagueness.
4. Don't practice gestures. If you think that your likely voters are concerned about where your arms are, you have been woking wiath an unrelistic (probably American) coach.
5. Don't touch the lectern. By all means use it as a place to write and perch notes.....but the white-knuckle death-grip is never inspiring. Speak and move as though the lectern simply doesn't exist.
In the USA, the generally percieved winner of the Presidential Debates has always gone on to win the Presidency. Here, Cameron's Premiership will be confirmed in the same way.
Friday, 9 April 2010
Specific Numbers Win
by Graham Davies
On this day in 1992, John Major's Tories receieved more votes than any other party in UK history. In 2005, Blair got fewer than Kinnock did in 1992.
Overall numbers of votes don't mattter: you have to mind the gap.
At last, it looks as though the Tories are opening up some clear blue water between them and Labour. Although there will be some narrowing in the 48 hours before the poll itself (fuelled by all the parties and the media having a fused vested interest in saying that it's desperately close), I expect the Tory lead to stay between 9 and 11 per cent.
Cameron has achieved this because he is now presenting more specifically than he has ever done before about actual numbers for specific actions. If he stays away from his previous tendency to spout worthy ideals and sticks to hardened, costed, detailed steps he will actually take, he will win a narrow, but working, majority.
by Graham Davies
On this day in 1992, John Major's Tories receieved more votes than any other party in UK history. In 2005, Blair got fewer than Kinnock did in 1992.
Overall numbers of votes don't mattter: you have to mind the gap.
At last, it looks as though the Tories are opening up some clear blue water between them and Labour. Although there will be some narrowing in the 48 hours before the poll itself (fuelled by all the parties and the media having a fused vested interest in saying that it's desperately close), I expect the Tory lead to stay between 9 and 11 per cent.
Cameron has achieved this because he is now presenting more specifically than he has ever done before about actual numbers for specific actions. If he stays away from his previous tendency to spout worthy ideals and sticks to hardened, costed, detailed steps he will actually take, he will win a narrow, but working, majority.
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
Beware the Background
by Graham Davies
Brown had the gravitas and Cameron had the energy. Those were the two most obvious differences between the speeches that launched the election campaign proper.
Cameron now even manages to make indignation sound attractive, without ever allowing it to deteriorate into a schoolboy whine. His choice of location, with the south of the Thames, with the camera pointing aspirationally towards Westminster, even had a touch of the John Major Soapbox about it.
Gordon Brown did not have to agonise where to make his own speech from. Standing out side 10 Downing Street says I'M HERE, YOU'RE NOT better than anywhere else.
But they both need to think about their backgrounds. I don't mean Old Etonian versus Son of the Manse. I mean the people they choose to be seen with when presenting.
Cameron chose a group of young PPCs who clearly have not been playing the game for long...hence them frequently looking looking away into the middle distance as their Leader trotted out something else that they have heard many times before.
On the other hand, Brown chose to speak in front of his battle-scarred Imperial Guard. Jack Straw's supportive smile was welded on with a metallic intesity....and Harriet Harman's approving nods make her bounce up and down like an over-keen pupil who still thinks she can be Head Girl one day.
Their professional efficiency had the air of a group who have been on duty for just a bit too long.
So advice for both main presenters: Dave, find a few older people to look keen on what you are saying. Gordon, find a few younger people to do the same job. If you can.
by Graham Davies
Brown had the gravitas and Cameron had the energy. Those were the two most obvious differences between the speeches that launched the election campaign proper.
Cameron now even manages to make indignation sound attractive, without ever allowing it to deteriorate into a schoolboy whine. His choice of location, with the south of the Thames, with the camera pointing aspirationally towards Westminster, even had a touch of the John Major Soapbox about it.
Gordon Brown did not have to agonise where to make his own speech from. Standing out side 10 Downing Street says I'M HERE, YOU'RE NOT better than anywhere else.
But they both need to think about their backgrounds. I don't mean Old Etonian versus Son of the Manse. I mean the people they choose to be seen with when presenting.
Cameron chose a group of young PPCs who clearly have not been playing the game for long...hence them frequently looking looking away into the middle distance as their Leader trotted out something else that they have heard many times before.
On the other hand, Brown chose to speak in front of his battle-scarred Imperial Guard. Jack Straw's supportive smile was welded on with a metallic intesity....and Harriet Harman's approving nods make her bounce up and down like an over-keen pupil who still thinks she can be Head Girl one day.
Their professional efficiency had the air of a group who have been on duty for just a bit too long.
So advice for both main presenters: Dave, find a few older people to look keen on what you are saying. Gordon, find a few younger people to do the same job. If you can.
Saturday, 3 April 2010
Poster Own Goal
by Graham Davies
The Millibands are a rather strained double-act at the best of times. If one brother ever challenged for the leadership of the Labour Party, he certainly could not be certain of the other brother's support.....unless they had come to a highly specific, preferably written and witnessed, agreement about it.
They looked deliciously uncomfortable on Sky News, trying to defend Labour's latest election poster. It depicts David Cameron sitting on top of an Audi Quattro, looking like a younger, cooler version of the iconic 1980s policeman, Gene Hunt.
Their contention was that the poster cleverly illustrated the electorate's fear that a Cameron government would turn the clock back a couple of decades. The problem is that this is precisely what a significant proportion of floating voters would like: a return to the robust business-oriented prosperity that epitomised the heyday of the last Tory regime.
But their limp defence highlighted something more presentationally profound than that: if you have to explain why something is funny and clever, then it really isn't all that funny or clever.
I hope that policians never really grasp this....because the blind spot they have for comedy is one of the things that can actually make some of their more ridiculous pronouncements rather entertaining for the rest of us.
by Graham Davies
The Millibands are a rather strained double-act at the best of times. If one brother ever challenged for the leadership of the Labour Party, he certainly could not be certain of the other brother's support.....unless they had come to a highly specific, preferably written and witnessed, agreement about it.
They looked deliciously uncomfortable on Sky News, trying to defend Labour's latest election poster. It depicts David Cameron sitting on top of an Audi Quattro, looking like a younger, cooler version of the iconic 1980s policeman, Gene Hunt.
Their contention was that the poster cleverly illustrated the electorate's fear that a Cameron government would turn the clock back a couple of decades. The problem is that this is precisely what a significant proportion of floating voters would like: a return to the robust business-oriented prosperity that epitomised the heyday of the last Tory regime.
But their limp defence highlighted something more presentationally profound than that: if you have to explain why something is funny and clever, then it really isn't all that funny or clever.
I hope that policians never really grasp this....because the blind spot they have for comedy is one of the things that can actually make some of their more ridiculous pronouncements rather entertaining for the rest of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
