Changing Comms
Okay, so first: I agree with Wells... polls, smolls... and some of the questions were totally random... not sure how people can have an opinion on the Liberal position on Afghanistan... cause I have no idea what that is... (maybe I've just been totally out of the loop... but anyone who knows and wants to share... I'd v appreciate it)...
... so that being said... this post isn't motivated by the polls... I was thinking about it last week... after having read the papers a "normal" amount while in Vietnam (i.e. not obsessively everyday - bad habit that's hard to shake, after working in politics)... I came to the following, though not earth shattering in any way conclusion: time to get rid of whoever is doing comms in the OLO...
... Now, I hate to sow the seeds of discord and speak out against my beloved party... but I have a hunch that whoever is responsible for comms in Dion's office is the same person that has been doing comms for him for at least the past two years... And as far as I can tell, the best thing that he/she did - was to get zero media coverage for Dion in the leadership campaign... (though instincts tell me that, that though it was a blessing in disguise, it was not the result of a carefully planned comms strategy)... oh yeah, and the green swag on Saturday and the Dion drink coasters were good too...
Climate change and Kyoto are extremely complex issues... the Protocol is one of the trickiest in international law... and to get the message right on them is a behemoth of a job... The Tories have a much easier spin on this: any time we say a peep about Kyoto - there they are brandishing about the fact that GHG emissions rose while the Liberals were in power... Doesn’t' matter that the Kyoto Protocol only entered into force in Feb 2005 - doesn't matter that the reason there was little progress on reducing GHGs precisely because of Tory opposition in the House... that one line of Tory spin is, I hate to say it, damn effective... and we can do better/we have to do better...
Everyone knows the reason that Stevie went from talking about "so called green house gases" to committing $1.5 billion dollars on climate change - is because the Liberals under Stephane Dion made climate change THE issue... and a good comms strategy would remind Canadians of that...
... I also have a feeling that the comms folks are the same ones that got Dion absolutely zero domestic press coverage right after got over 162 countries to agree to a post 2012 Kyoto framework. I can't emphasize enough how much of a big deal this is... we have a hard enough time agreeing domestically within Canada on how we want to address climate change... meanwhile, Dion, steps up, gets 162 countries to come together and agree on how to move forward on reducing GHGs after the reduction period of Kyoto (which runs from 2008 - 2012) ends... The amount of kudos and accolades he got internationally was outstanding... the domestic coverage (in the middle of a federal election campaign when we were in desperate need of good press) was zip, zilch, zero...
...So there you have it... I think it's time for the Dion OLO to start mixing things up... comms wise...
posted by JJ @ 10:41 AM
11 comments
11 Comments:
I pretty much agree with your thesis. Our messaging hasn't been good at all. But more importantly, there were coasters? Where?
Ahah! Yes, coaster gallore at the Dion convention hospitality suite...managed to nab a few... maybe I'll auction on Ebay... or maybe I should wait till the poll numbers improve :-)
Let me take a stab at it:
I believe the official Liberal position on Afghanistan is that the mission is supported, but that a re-examining of what its goals are to be are needed.. and that rushing an extension of it thru like Harper did was unwise and politically partisan-motivated.
How's that?
Ahh. After I saw it was a cash bar I got the hell outta dodge. If it had been open bar I think he could have taken it a ballot sooner.
Thanks, Scott... but I guess the point that I was trying to make is that they've done a really poor job of communicating what the strategy is exactly...
And Jeff, well the free booze was on a first come first serve basis... so as you can imagine, it kind of went dry rather quickly... guess they should have done a buy a drink get a coaster line (yet another example of the need to improve the comms strategy)...
JJ: I do agree on the communications strategy being.. not up to snuff so far. Apologies for missing the point you were trying to make by saying that.
I had a general post on the matter yesterday on what I thought the Party could do better (if my opinion means much.. which I doubt it does) but I think Jonathan over at TDH made a good suggestion for Dion's handlers as well.
Thanks for the links, Scott... I do think that environment and Kyoto is still a really good issue for us... just takes great comms skill to put the message back on track... and as for your proportional representation suggestion...though well put...I have to admit... I'm not a fan...
Well, if you have time and you feel like reading some articles, I have saved on file the pieces from the May 2004 Globe and Mail which laid out the Mixed-Member PR model that they endorsed. and which I like and have endorsed.
I can certainly send them to you in email if you haven't read them and would like to study the model and read their analysis for why they support it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
(That's if you're interested of course.. if you're not, no worries)
Speaking of Afghanistan and the need to clarify that position, it seems a lot of Liberals (in the blogosphere anyhow) are on the same wavelength - Jonathan again with another good article on what you were talking about JJ.
And, I wonder on an unrelated note if you've all heard about the cheapshot Harper just pulled on a Liberal MP in the House. I'd like to say I'm not surprised, but I can't.
Hi JJ:
Welcome back to North America. I agree that the Communications in the OLO on Afghanistan and Kyoto have allowed the leader to either be mis-characterized or ridiculed. The new leader has tried to build consensus on the Afghanistan issue and bridge 2 legitimate, but diametrically opposed positions on Afghanistan. The latest new position - get out in 2009 is far more sensible than the previous one.
Post a Comment
<< Home