“We live in a strange time, suicide bombs, waves of refugees, Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, even Brexit.” (Hypernormalisation 2016) Over the past couple of years, political results in the western culture have been unpredictable, creating a huge divide in political opinion. In this essay I want to address why these results have turned out the way they did, specifically looking at the General Election in 2017. I will explore why the masses made these political decisions, and what influenced them to do so; In particular, the rising popularity of social media.
The first chapter will explore the psychology behind politics. Focusing on Theresa May’s and Jeremy Corbyn’s policies and how much of an influence this had on the voters, and analysing the political poster, particularly how effective it is to voters.
Chapter two will primarily focus on the media which has a big part to play in politics. It will start by analyzing the tabloids impact on who people vote for and then lead on to how Social media has played a role in politics, and how the use of algorithms can now be used to target and manipulate voters.
The final chapter will go on to look at political activism and how this is achieved in art and design, and also looking at how social media can be used as a platform for political protest and collective action.
“I have just shared a meeting with the cabinet, where we agreed that the government should call a general election, to be held on the 28th June.” (Theresa May 2017) Theresa May stated on the 18th April, shortly after calling a surprise general election. Stating that her intentions were to bring “Unity in Westminster” (Theresa May 2017) which the Conservative government has, according to May, delivered after the Brexit result. After predictions of financial decline, the Conservatives have “Since the referendum, seen consumer confidence remain high, record numbers of jobs and economic growth has exceeded expectations.” (Theresa May 2017) May aimed her speech at those who voted to leave the EU, and by calling this election she believed that by making the main priority about Brexit, she could influence the Leave voters into siding with the Conservatives.
“Our opponents believe, that because our majority is so small that resolve will weaken and they can force us to change course, they are wrong. They underestimate our determination.” To get the job done.” (Theresa May 2017) Here May talks about the majority that her government possessed, addressing the fact that other parties could interfere with the “Strong and Stable” (Theresa May 2017) leadership in which the Conservative party had shown through the result of Brexit, and that voting for these other parties would mean that the public have less control over the Brexit decisions which were soon to be negotiated. By using language to convey a sense of control and stability, May was targeting exactly what the Leave voters wanted, control over Britain. People believed that this could be done by controlling Britain’s borders and laws, and this is exactly what May stated she wanted to achieve by holding this election: “We will regain control over our own money, our own laws and our own borders.” (Theresa May 2017)
When the Election was called on 18th April 2017, The Conservatives were well ahead in the polls “Tory support was already rising to above 45 per cent before she did so.” (John Rentoul 2017)This tactical decision for the Conservatives to gain the majority vote looked likely, as throughout the past year there had been lack of confidence in the Labour party over their leader Jeremy Corbyn. The Conservatives took advantage of this, stating their government would bring “Strong and stable leadership.” However, throughout the buildup to the election, opinions started to change which lead to a result that, like Brexit and the election of Donald Trump in 2016, was not expected.
Chapter 1: The psychology which runs politics
“A politician emerged who believed that people should be allowed to express themselves”.
(century of the self 2002)
Thatcher used Freudian psychotherapy techniques as a means of investigating human desires though the unconscious. This was discovered by Edward Bernays who took Freud’s theories of the unconscious he discovered that corporations could encourage the masses to consume their products and services. “He was called Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud. Bernays had been one of the inventors of public relations and he was fascinated by his Uncle’s theory that human behavior was driven by unconscious sexual desires.” (Century of the self 2002) Politicians started to discover that this sense of individualism, which developed from capitalism, could be used in the same way in their policies; using the public’s individual desires to help get them into power.
Individualism promoted an idea that everyone was different, and that every person wants and desires different things. This brought a new ideology to politics, as in the past the masses had been grouped into their social classes. Individualism destructed these social ideas as every person was different in their own way. Wanting and consuming different things, and using products as a way of expressing themselves.
“Some Socialists seem to believe that people should be numbers in a State computer. We believe they should be individuals. We are all unequal. No one, thank heavens, is like anyone else, however much the Socialists may pretend otherwise. We believe that everyone has the right to be unequal but to us every human being is equally important. (century of the self 2002) Here, Thatcher is demonstrating this new idea of individualism in politics; in the same way that advertising was being utilised by businesses’ to make products appeal to the unconscious desires of potential customers, Thatcher used people’s sense of individualism to make her policies appeal to them. People were no longer being seen as part of a group dictated by their social class; politicians were starting to see voters as individuals. “The idea of asking people their wants and desires, and then giving it to them, was seen as alien in the ruling elite. To challenge their belief that they knew what was best”. (century of the self 2002) This new sense of individualism meant that peoples desires came first, as by getting what the media and advertising convinced them that they wanted, people thought it would make them better and happier. This self-centered outlook meant that people were only interested in policies that directly affected them, meaning politics was now being run the same way as a business as the politicians had to cater to the wants and needs of the voters, much like how businesses have to appeal to potential consumers. Thatcher was aware of this: “A man’s right to work as he will to spend what he earns, to have the state as servants and not as the master.” (century of the self 2002) People were demanding that the tax money that they spent would benefit them.
For the Labour party however, the new desires of the working class meant that their voters were losing interest. The socialist ideology held by Labour party held was no longer what the people wanted. In 1997, Tony Blair introduced a New Labour, inspired by Bill Clinton. Clinton realised that people were much more willing to pay tax if it benefitted them personally, rather than only benefitting others. “What the people give, the people can take away.” (century of the self 2002) Even the left had given in to democracy, realising that politics had to run like a business in order to gain power, by making the individual feel secure. “Labour dropped policies that did not directly benefit swing voters, even if it meant sacrificing its fundamental prin
ciples, the commitment to the public”. (century of the self 2002)
So how did Bernays theories on individualistic desires come into the General election 2017? When looking at the two main parties; run by Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May, both had very different ideas in their manifestos. In Corbyn’s case striving for a “fairer Britain” (Labour party 2017) Where the labour manifesto went back to its roots of a party for the working class, ditching Blair’s new labour ideology’s, Corbyn’s tag line became “For the many not the few” (Labour party 2017)
“This is our vision for a country that works for the many, not just the privileged few. With Labour, we’ll build a country where we invest our wealth to give everyone the best chance. That means building the homes we need to rent and buy, keeping our communities safe with more police officers, giving our children’s schools the funding they badly need, and restoring the NHS to its place as the envy of the world.” (Labour party 2017)
The introduction to Corbyn’s manifesto shows his attempt to make Britain a fairer place for everyone, by investing and giving back to the country. Corbyn talks about saving the National Health Service and investing more into the police and schools. The policies which Corbyn introduces in the Labour manifesto aim for a more equal society. Corbyns most talked about policies leading up to the election were his aims to increase taxes on big corporations, invest into the state such as the emergency services and minimize the cost of university tuition fees. “Corbyn’s pledges include £11.2 billion to scrap university tuition fees, £6.3 billion extra funding for schools, £5 billion for health and £2.1 billion for social care, and £4 billion to lift the Conservatives’ 1% cap on public sector pay increases.”(Nicole Morely 2017)
So which audience did these Labour policies appeal to? Do Bernays ideas on invidualism still have an effect on politics today? Corbyn’s socialist ideologies aim to benefit everyone rather than targeting certain individuals as New Labour previously had.
In contrast to how Corbyn aimed his policies into investing for the benefit and welfare of Britain, Theresa May focused on leading the country through Brexit, which neither May or Corbyn had campaigned for.
In May’s statement calling for the election she uses the tactic of smearing other political parties “And the decision facing the country will be all about leadership. It will be a choice between strong and stable leadership in the national interest, with me as your prime minister, or weak and unstable coalition government, led by Jeremy Corbyn, propped up by the Liberal Democrats, who want to reopen the divisions of the referendum, and Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP.” (Theresa May 2017) Here, May uses her speech to try and convince the voters who wanted Brexit that the Conservative government was the best party to lead. Appealing to the large amount of voters that voted to leave the EU meant that a large percentage of the population would be more willing to back her. The result of Brexit demonstrated that the majority of the public wanted to take back control of Britain. Unlike Corbyn, May listened to the wants and needs of these voters, and promised to lead the country through Brexit. “It was with reluctance that I decided the country needs this election, but it is with strong conviction that I say it is necessary to secure the strong and stable leadership the country needs to see us through Brexit and beyond.”
To what extent did the policies and manifestos have an effect on the voters in the general election? Evidence from the polls shows that age caused the biggest divide in voters instead of class. “In electoral terms, age seems to be the new dividing line in British politics. The starkest way to show this is to note that, amongst first time voters (those aged 18 and 19), Labour was forty-seven percentage points ahead. Amongst those aged over 70, the Conservatives had a lead of fifty percentage points.”(YouGov 2017) How much of the parties policies have an effect on the voters decisions, Mays strong stance on Brexit during the election could have played a role in the lack of younger conservative voters, as the correlation between the divide in age is also evident in Brexit.
Not only would younger voters be less likely to vote for a party who’s main priority is to make Brexit happen when the majority of them did not vote for it, but Corbyn’s policies were also more desirable for the younger audience. Policies which aim to reduce the price of student loans and make housing more affordable would not appeal as much to an older audience, as the older generations are much more likely to already have secured a house and be paying a mortgage. However younger generations, especially the working class are struggling to be able to afford to buy into the housing market due to the housing crisis. The same is true for University tuition fees, as only recently get the exact date have been implemented, meaning only younger voters have been affected by this.
Although Corbyn aimed his manifesto to reach the many, by the polls only the younger were willing to vote for labour, the sense of individualism in voting is still apparent in the general election, as older were less inclined to vote fot these policies as that different not have a direct effect on them, whilst these policies would make an impact of the younger generation. Much like May’s campaign to lead a strong brexit, younger voters were less inclined to vote for May due to the correlation of young people that voted to stay in the EU.
Other than the phycology behind influencing voters through party policies, the use of visual propaganda is an important factor into swaying voters opinion.
Propaganda can be defined as “the deliberate attempt to influence the public opinions of an audience, through the transmission of ideas and values, for a specific persuasive purpose that has been consciously thought out and designed to serve the self-interest of the propagandist, either directly or indirectly.” (Welch, 2010)
Visual communication in the media is an important factor for political propaganda, the use of image and text can be used to manipulate the audience opinion. In 1979, a poster emerged for Thatcher’s Conservative party campaign which read “Labour isn’t working.”(Figure 2) captioned “Britain’s better off with the Conservatives.” (Figure 2) The poster depicted a long queue of people at the unemployment office.
“It only appeared on a handful of sites, was backed by a minuscule budget and its imagery was faked. Yet it’s fair to say that the 1979 poster for the Conservative Party declaring ‘Labour isn’t working’ was a game-changer.”(History of Advertising No 90: ‘Labour isn’t working’ poster 2014)
The poster, which although was communicating an accurate representation of the lack of employment in the UK at the time, was actually manipulated. “Unable to use real unemployed people, Saatchi & Saatchi turned to members of the Hendon Young Conservatives, who were asked to gather at a North London park for the shoot. But less than 20 people turned up.” (History of Advertising No 90: ‘Labour isn’t working’ poster 2014) This meant that the people were just simply photographed multiple times. The dishonesty from the Conservatives enraged the Labour party. Political propaganda which smeared the opposition was completely new, which was another reason for the controversy of the poster. “Margaret Thatcher initially rejected this famous poster, telling Saatchi & Saatchi chairman Tim Bell: “You know perfectly well that you should never have the other side’s name in your own poster!”(Sam Delaney 2015) Rather than u
sing the coverage to boost their government policies they instead focused on what the other party was doing wrong. This tactic of using smear campaigning was seen frequently in the buildup to the most recent General Election.
Now the use of image manipulation and smearing the other party have been taken to new levels. One Conservative party campaign poster showed the opposition leader Corbyn, playing on the fact that Corbyn doesn’t condone nuclear weapons. This doubles as a personal attack on Corbyn, as well as his policies. The influence of individualistic phycology which has diluted politics can also be seen here “More debt higher taxes” (Figure 3) is something which will directly effect particular voters who voted for Corbyn. This poster is more likely to be targeted at wealthier voters who do not want their income to be taxed higher than it is.
However how effective is the poster in today’s society? Posters traditionally were seen on billboards and were posted through people’s letterboxes. However, with the rise of the internet politicians can now take to social media to display their propaganda, although the bigger the following the more effective the propaganda will be. On Facebook Jeremy Corbyn has 1.3 million likes as of December 2017(@JeremycorbynMP 2017) whilst May has 430,000.(@Theresamayofficial) With Corbyn evidently having more support on social media means that it will be easier for the Labour party to create propaganda which is visible to more of an audience.
Chapter 2: The influence of the Media
The tabloid newspaper known today as The Sun was founded in 1969. The previous tabloid was named ‘The Daily Herald’ (Curran & Seaton 2010) which was falling in sales, even after 1955 when it was rebranded. (Curran & Seaton2 010)
However, even after the rebranding of the newspaper, and targeting the “social radicals” (Curran & Seaton 2010) the paper’s readership continued to fall compared to its rivals such as The Daily Mail and the Daily Express. After remarketing the paper, it both lost the support of some of its old readers from before the rebranding, but also struggled to bring in a new audience. (Curran & Seaton 2010) “IPC’s market research showed that the paper failed both to please old Herald readers and to attract young, affluent, social radicals.” (Curran & Seaton 2010)
This led the paper to struggle financially, until in 1969 when it was sold to Rupert Murdoch. “In 1969, IPC sold The Sun to Rupert Murdoch for a modest sum, rumoured to be around £60,000” (The Telegraph 2000) The Sun became a newspaper for the working class. The paper changed the focus of its content, by starting to report on entertainment and TV, and also launched the famous Page 3. The Labour sided newspaper which it once was had changed. However, it’s sales had increased “The circulation figures rose impressively. The old Sun had been selling 850,000 in 1969; Lamb’s replacement reached 1.26 million within a month, 1.5 million after 100 days, and 2 million by 1971.” (The Telegraph 2000)
The Sun has been known for its controversial headlines and radical political opinion, such as the headline shown in Figure 4. The views presented by The Sun are ultimately controlled by Murdoch since he took control of the paper, which he has been able to utilise as propaganda to influence readers to vote how he wants them to.
After taking control of the paper in 1969, Murdoch appointed Sir Larry Lamb as the editor of the newspaper. The timeline of The Sun’s support of particular parties throughout the years has switched back and forth. When first taken over by Murdoch the paper remained supportive of the Labour party. “Meanwhile, Lamb had taken The Sun’s political allegiance right across the political spectrum. In 1970 it had supported Harold Wilson, albeit with reservations. In the first election of 1974 the paper supported Edward Heath; in the second it equivocated. During the Heath administration The Sun had coined the phrase “Thatcher, Milk-Snatcher”.” (The Telegraph 2000)
However, the paper then changed its support to Thatcher and the Conservative party in 1979, Urging voters to vote for Thatcher. “A Message to Labour supporters – “Vote Tory this time.” (The Telegraph 2000)
In the run up to the 1992 General Election, although Labour was slightly ahead in the polls, The Sun continued to back the Conservatives despite Thatcher’s resignation.
“From the beginning of the campaign on 11 March, the parties were neck and neck in the opinion polls, with Labour fractionally ahead. The commentators predicted a hung parliament; the only question, it seemed, was whether Labour or the Tories would be the largest party. Even the exit polls suggested a hung parliament.” (Anthony Heath 1994)
The Sun used derogatory headlines to influence readers against the Labour leader Neil Kinnock, as seen in Figure 6. The headline was a very direct attack on Kinnock, implying that a vote for Labour would have severe negative consequences for the country. In addition to this, an image of Kinnock’s head was shown inside a lightbulb, an image which stood out and made him look ridiculous.
Although in the polls a hung parliament was suggested, the Tories still a managed to grasp voters, leading to a terrible defeat for Labour “The Government had 42.8 per cent of the vote, Labour 35.2 per cent. The Tories had lost only a fraction of the vote they recorded in 1987.” (Anthony Heath 1994)
After the Conservatives won the election, The Sun then released the headline “It’s The Sun wot won it.”(Figure 5) implying that The Sun’s media influence was the reason the Conservatives managed to win unexpectedly.
This brings into question how much influence the media has over political campaigns and public opinion. Was the unexpected result of the Conservatives in 1992 due to The Sun’s media campaigning? The Sun was one of the best-selling newspapers in the UK at the time. “In 1978 The Sun overtook the Mirror to become Britain’s biggest-selling daily paper” (Torin Douglas 2004)
In addition to this, it also appealed to working class readers, who were generally swing voters in the election. Even Kinnock himself said in his Labour resignation speech that the media had a role to play in the Conservatives winning the election “As the election process opens, I have only one piece of advice for the Labour movement at every level: do not feed and do not believe the press and broadcasting media in their reporting of these events.” (Kinnock 1992)
However, the next Labour leader Tony Blair managed to get the support of The Sun, who encouraged the masses to support him as well.
“On 17 March 1997, John Major, the incumbent Conservative Prime Minister, announced that the general election would be held on 1 May. The unusually long notice, six weeks, would he hoped give him time
to improve his apparently hopeless position in the opinion polls. Yet within hours his hopes of a morale-boosting lift-off were devastated. For the next morning, The Sun, Britain’s best-selling national daily paper, announced that it was backing Labour.” (J.Curtice 1999) Again, the candidate backed by The Sun won. However, The Sun was not the only paper who changed to support Blair. Unlike in past elections, the right wing press changed their support from Conservative to Labour, which could have influenced their readers to vote the same way. Readers will pick papers which sit within their views QUOTE EVIDENCE. So in 1997 when the newspapers decided to support Labour, this meant that Conservative voting readers that have faith in the newspaper they read were influenced to vote for Labour.
“But if newspapers change their message, as happened in the 1997 British election, then their readers cannot be considered to carry the legacy of past persuasion. In short, if newspapers can influence votes, then the one occasion on which we should be able to see their influence is when a paper changes sides” (J. Curtis 1999)
It is evident that since Murdoch has taken over The Sun, the political party that they support often wins the election. This suggests that either The Sun has substantial influence on the readers of the paper, or simply that The Sun choose the particular party to support based on their popularity and who is most likely to win. When the right wing press changed their support for Labour in 1997, rather than the newspapers influencing the voters, could the newspapers simply have supported the party due to the readers showing their support for Blair?
Studies have also been done which show that readers also acknowledge that the media has been filtered and manipulated “Nimmo and combs propose that the majority of Americans now accept as normal the fact that they are confined to encountering politics as a set of second-hand (manipulated and distorted) media images.” (Eric louw) Meaning that if the readers are aware of this the papers political information will have little influence on them.
In the 2017 election, the newspapers each chose to support a political party and used their platform as a means of influence. The papers that once supported Blair continued to support Conservative as they had with David Cameron, and like the headlines with Kinnock, The Sun wrote derogatory headlines about Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour party leader.
Here the headline reads “Cor-bin”, a personal attack on Corbyn, similar to slanders The Sun had previously used towards Kinnock. Photo manipulation is used to make Corbyn look ridiculous by editing an unflattering image of him to appear inside of a wheelie bin, damaging the readers’ opinion of him and making them less inclined to vote for him.
Although Theresa May still won the election, there was a hung parliament, something which was not expected until the polls, even the day before the conservatives were still ahead “But the polls suggest it could be anywhere between a one and 12-point Conservative lead”.(BBC 2017) Before this, the polls had been predicting a clear Conservative win since the election was announced “Tory support was already rising to above 45 per cent before she did so.” (John Rentoul 2017) It is possible that despite being historically right-wing, some papers could have only backed May due to her popularity at the start of the election campaign, which soon started to diminish.
During the 2017 General Election, it can be seen from YouGov’s graph of the percentage of votes split by newspaper readership (FIGURE 9) that people were likely to vote how the newspaper they read wants them to. The more right wing the newspaper, the more Conservative the reader. Unlike the 1997 General Election where right-wings papers went against their usual political views to encourage readers to vote for Blair, the newspapers were making content that the readers wanted to hear.
The newspapers may not have been as influential in the 2017 Election as they have been in the past because of the rise of social media. Social media is defined as “Websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.” (Oxford dictionary 2017)
Social media has created a completely new way of communicating the news, exposing people to politics who would previously stay away from it. New media has developed throughout the 20th and 21st century such as radio and television, but the internet has bought a whole new means of communication, due the interactivity of being able to connect and share information all around the world instantly. The popularity of social media means that images and information can be spread to a large audience extremely quickly. “Facebook, launched in 2004, has now reached 1.4 billion active monthly users worldwide, Twitter, started in 2006, currently has 288 million monthly active users posting 500 million tweets daily” (Obar & Wildman2015) However the nature of social media means that anyone is able to post content meaning there is a lack of control in what information is posted which is not the case with traditional news. “The raw material of news must pass through successive filters, leaving only the cleansed residue fit to print. They fix the premises of discourse and interpretation, and the definition of what is newsworthy in the first place, and they explain the basis and operations of what amount to propaganda campaigns.” (Herman & Chomsky 1988)
Social media has created a platform where content is controlled by everyone, not just traditional news sources. In the build-up to the American presidential election in 2016, it was evident that social media can be used in politics to win over voters in a completely new way.
The 2016 election was won by Donald Trump, a businessman and television personality. Trump’s controversial radical right-wing views lead to a lot of media attention, but the role of social media also had a part to play in Trump’s popularity.
Trump managed to change the way in which people follow the media with the term fake news. Social media allows politicians to speak and communicate without any forms of control or filter from the media. He used this personal connection to his followers to challenge some of the negative press that he was getting, which most politicians just accept. He managed to use the term to play down any bad publicity against himself in the traditional media. “@CNN is in a total meltdown with their FAKE NEWS because their ratings are tanking since election and their credibility will soon be gone!” (Donald Trump 2017) As the mainstream media were largely against Trump, the use of the fake news catchphrase and the direct, unfiltered communication to his followers through Twitter meant that he was able to fight back and discredit them.
Like Trump Corbyn was also displayed negatively in the media. However, he was on the other side of the spectrum to Trump due to his left wing ideologies. Although Corbyn was portrayed badly in the media, he was popular on social media and online forums. Showing the support for Corbyn on social media is far stronger. The popularity for Corbyn on social media also correlates with the divide between the age groups between the Conservative and Labour parties. Shown in Figure 1, Shows clearly that Labour is more desirable for the younger generation, the older the voter the more likely they are to vote conservative. Could the influence of the mainstream media have more of an impact on older generations, whilst social media creates new forms of communication and creates a different point of view, meaning voters have more information to decide who to vote for? Or could this show that because of
social media, it is easier for information and trends to circulate, thus meaning that Corbyn could just simply be a trend which the younger voters decided to endorse and support to fit into a crowd.
Trump managed to use the amount of media attention he got and to his advantage with his right wing views which caused a large amount of negative attention. Adam Curtis simply described it as “Angry people click” (Hypernormalisation 2016). Meaning his controversial statements lead him to dilute social media with Trump leading to a surge in his popularity.
Social media also creates what is known as an Echo Chamber. “As the intelligence systems online gathered evermore data, new forms of guidance began to emerge. Social media created filters, complex algorithms that looked at what individuals liked, and then fed more of the same back to them.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016) Social media is designed to only see content which the user likes, for example on Instagram and Twitter you choose who you follow and what content to see, and on Reddit you subscribe to forums which you are interested in meaning users only ever view content that they want to see. “The liberals were outraged by Trump. But they expressed their anger in cyberspace, so it had no effect because the algorithms made sure that they only spoke to people that agreed with them.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016) This means that users only follow others who agree with their political beliefs, meaning that no one ever challenges these beliefs leaving no room for social change. “In the process, individuals began to move without realising it into bubbles that isolated them from enormous amounts of other information.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016)
The creation on the company Cambridge Analyitica has also been able to use algorithms to influence social media users. There is evidence that Cambridge Analytica are able to build up a detailed profile of individuals based on their social media likes, their followers, their circles, and use algorithms to determine their political views. From this they could identify Persuadable voters, and target them with propaganda specific to them. “Finding persuadable voters is key for any campaign and with its treasure trove of data, Cambridge Analytica could target people high in neuroticism, for example, with images of immigrants “swamping” the country. The key is finding emotional triggers for each individual voter.”(Carole Cadwalladr 2017)
The first chapter will explore the psychology behind politics. Focusing on Theresa May’s and Jeremy Corbyn’s policies and how much of an influence this had on the voters, and analysing the political poster, particularly how effective it is to voters.
Chapter two will primarily focus on the media which has a big part to play in politics. It will start by analyzing the tabloids impact on who people vote for and then lead on to how Social media has played a role in politics, and how the use of algorithms can now be used to target and manipulate voters.
The final chapter will go on to look at political activism and how this is achieved in art and design, and also looking at how social media can be used as a platform for political protest and collective action.
“I have just shared a meeting with the cabinet, where we agreed that the government should call a general election, to be held on the 28th June.” (Theresa May 2017) Theresa May stated on the 18th April, shortly after calling a surprise general election. Stating that her intentions were to bring “Unity in Westminster” (Theresa May 2017) which the Conservative government has, according to May, delivered after the Brexit result. After predictions of financial decline, the Conservatives have “Since the referendum, seen consumer confidence remain high, record numbers of jobs and economic growth has exceeded expectations.” (Theresa May 2017) May aimed her speech at those who voted to leave the EU, and by calling this election she believed that by making the main priority about Brexit, she could influence the Leave voters into siding with the Conservatives.
“Our opponents believe, that because our majority is so small that resolve will weaken and they can force us to change course, they are wrong. They underestimate our determination.” To get the job done.” (Theresa May 2017) Here May talks about the majority that her government possessed, addressing the fact that other parties could interfere with the “Strong and Stable” (Theresa May 2017) leadership in which the Conservative party had shown through the result of Brexit, and that voting for these other parties would mean that the public have less control over the Brexit decisions which were soon to be negotiated. By using language to convey a sense of control and stability, May was targeting exactly what the Leave voters wanted, control over Britain. People believed that this could be done by controlling Britain’s borders and laws, and this is exactly what May stated she wanted to achieve by holding this election: “We will regain control over our own money, our own laws and our own borders.” (Theresa May 2017)
When the Election was called on 18th April 2017, The Conservatives were well ahead in the polls “Tory support was already rising to above 45 per cent before she did so.” (John Rentoul 2017)This tactical decision for the Conservatives to gain the majority vote looked likely, as throughout the past year there had been lack of confidence in the Labour party over their leader Jeremy Corbyn. The Conservatives took advantage of this, stating their government would bring “Strong and stable leadership.” However, throughout the buildup to the election, opinions started to change which lead to a result that, like Brexit and the election of Donald Trump in 2016, was not expected.
Chapter 1: The psychology which runs politics
“A politician emerged who believed that people should be allowed to express themselves”.
(century of the self 2002)
Thatcher used Freudian psychotherapy techniques as a means of investigating human desires though the unconscious. This was discovered by Edward Bernays who took Freud’s theories of the unconscious he discovered that corporations could encourage the masses to consume their products and services. “He was called Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud. Bernays had been one of the inventors of public relations and he was fascinated by his Uncle’s theory that human behavior was driven by unconscious sexual desires.” (Century of the self 2002) Politicians started to discover that this sense of individualism, which developed from capitalism, could be used in the same way in their policies; using the public’s individual desires to help get them into power.
Individualism promoted an idea that everyone was different, and that every person wants and desires different things. This brought a new ideology to politics, as in the past the masses had been grouped into their social classes. Individualism destructed these social ideas as every person was different in their own way. Wanting and consuming different things, and using products as a way of expressing themselves.
“Some Socialists seem to believe that people should be numbers in a State computer. We believe they should be individuals. We are all unequal. No one, thank heavens, is like anyone else, however much the Socialists may pretend otherwise. We believe that everyone has the right to be unequal but to us every human being is equally important. (century of the self 2002) Here, Thatcher is demonstrating this new idea of individualism in politics; in the same way that advertising was being utilised by businesses’ to make products appeal to the unconscious desires of potential customers, Thatcher used people’s sense of individualism to make her policies appeal to them. People were no longer being seen as part of a group dictated by their social class; politicians were starting to see voters as individuals. “The idea of asking people their wants and desires, and then giving it to them, was seen as alien in the ruling elite. To challenge their belief that they knew what was best”. (century of the self 2002) This new sense of individualism meant that peoples desires came first, as by getting what the media and advertising convinced them that they wanted, people thought it would make them better and happier. This self-centered outlook meant that people were only interested in policies that directly affected them, meaning politics was now being run the same way as a business as the politicians had to cater to the wants and needs of the voters, much like how businesses have to appeal to potential consumers. Thatcher was aware of this: “A man’s right to work as he will to spend what he earns, to have the state as servants and not as the master.” (century of the self 2002) People were demanding that the tax money that they spent would benefit them.
For the Labour party however, the new desires of the working class meant that their voters were losing interest. The socialist ideology held by Labour party held was no longer what the people wanted. In 1997, Tony Blair introduced a New Labour, inspired by Bill Clinton. Clinton realised that people were much more willing to pay tax if it benefitted them personally, rather than only benefitting others. “What the people give, the people can take away.” (century of the self 2002) Even the left had given in to democracy, realising that politics had to run like a business in order to gain power, by making the individual feel secure. “Labour dropped policies that did not directly benefit swing voters, even if it meant sacrificing its fundamental prin
ciples, the commitment to the public”. (century of the self 2002)
So how did Bernays theories on individualistic desires come into the General election 2017? When looking at the two main parties; run by Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May, both had very different ideas in their manifestos. In Corbyn’s case striving for a “fairer Britain” (Labour party 2017) Where the labour manifesto went back to its roots of a party for the working class, ditching Blair’s new labour ideology’s, Corbyn’s tag line became “For the many not the few” (Labour party 2017)
“This is our vision for a country that works for the many, not just the privileged few. With Labour, we’ll build a country where we invest our wealth to give everyone the best chance. That means building the homes we need to rent and buy, keeping our communities safe with more police officers, giving our children’s schools the funding they badly need, and restoring the NHS to its place as the envy of the world.” (Labour party 2017)
The introduction to Corbyn’s manifesto shows his attempt to make Britain a fairer place for everyone, by investing and giving back to the country. Corbyn talks about saving the National Health Service and investing more into the police and schools. The policies which Corbyn introduces in the Labour manifesto aim for a more equal society. Corbyns most talked about policies leading up to the election were his aims to increase taxes on big corporations, invest into the state such as the emergency services and minimize the cost of university tuition fees. “Corbyn’s pledges include £11.2 billion to scrap university tuition fees, £6.3 billion extra funding for schools, £5 billion for health and £2.1 billion for social care, and £4 billion to lift the Conservatives’ 1% cap on public sector pay increases.”(Nicole Morely 2017)
So which audience did these Labour policies appeal to? Do Bernays ideas on invidualism still have an effect on politics today? Corbyn’s socialist ideologies aim to benefit everyone rather than targeting certain individuals as New Labour previously had.
In contrast to how Corbyn aimed his policies into investing for the benefit and welfare of Britain, Theresa May focused on leading the country through Brexit, which neither May or Corbyn had campaigned for.
In May’s statement calling for the election she uses the tactic of smearing other political parties “And the decision facing the country will be all about leadership. It will be a choice between strong and stable leadership in the national interest, with me as your prime minister, or weak and unstable coalition government, led by Jeremy Corbyn, propped up by the Liberal Democrats, who want to reopen the divisions of the referendum, and Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP.” (Theresa May 2017) Here, May uses her speech to try and convince the voters who wanted Brexit that the Conservative government was the best party to lead. Appealing to the large amount of voters that voted to leave the EU meant that a large percentage of the population would be more willing to back her. The result of Brexit demonstrated that the majority of the public wanted to take back control of Britain. Unlike Corbyn, May listened to the wants and needs of these voters, and promised to lead the country through Brexit. “It was with reluctance that I decided the country needs this election, but it is with strong conviction that I say it is necessary to secure the strong and stable leadership the country needs to see us through Brexit and beyond.”
To what extent did the policies and manifestos have an effect on the voters in the general election? Evidence from the polls shows that age caused the biggest divide in voters instead of class. “In electoral terms, age seems to be the new dividing line in British politics. The starkest way to show this is to note that, amongst first time voters (those aged 18 and 19), Labour was forty-seven percentage points ahead. Amongst those aged over 70, the Conservatives had a lead of fifty percentage points.”(YouGov 2017) How much of the parties policies have an effect on the voters decisions, Mays strong stance on Brexit during the election could have played a role in the lack of younger conservative voters, as the correlation between the divide in age is also evident in Brexit.
Not only would younger voters be less likely to vote for a party who’s main priority is to make Brexit happen when the majority of them did not vote for it, but Corbyn’s policies were also more desirable for the younger audience. Policies which aim to reduce the price of student loans and make housing more affordable would not appeal as much to an older audience, as the older generations are much more likely to already have secured a house and be paying a mortgage. However younger generations, especially the working class are struggling to be able to afford to buy into the housing market due to the housing crisis. The same is true for University tuition fees, as only recently get the exact date have been implemented, meaning only younger voters have been affected by this.
Although Corbyn aimed his manifesto to reach the many, by the polls only the younger were willing to vote for labour, the sense of individualism in voting is still apparent in the general election, as older were less inclined to vote fot these policies as that different not have a direct effect on them, whilst these policies would make an impact of the younger generation. Much like May’s campaign to lead a strong brexit, younger voters were less inclined to vote for May due to the correlation of young people that voted to stay in the EU.
Other than the phycology behind influencing voters through party policies, the use of visual propaganda is an important factor into swaying voters opinion.
Propaganda can be defined as “the deliberate attempt to influence the public opinions of an audience, through the transmission of ideas and values, for a specific persuasive purpose that has been consciously thought out and designed to serve the self-interest of the propagandist, either directly or indirectly.” (Welch, 2010)
Visual communication in the media is an important factor for political propaganda, the use of image and text can be used to manipulate the audience opinion. In 1979, a poster emerged for Thatcher’s Conservative party campaign which read “Labour isn’t working.”(Figure 2) captioned “Britain’s better off with the Conservatives.” (Figure 2) The poster depicted a long queue of people at the unemployment office.
“It only appeared on a handful of sites, was backed by a minuscule budget and its imagery was faked. Yet it’s fair to say that the 1979 poster for the Conservative Party declaring ‘Labour isn’t working’ was a game-changer.”(History of Advertising No 90: ‘Labour isn’t working’ poster 2014)
The poster, which although was communicating an accurate representation of the lack of employment in the UK at the time, was actually manipulated. “Unable to use real unemployed people, Saatchi & Saatchi turned to members of the Hendon Young Conservatives, who were asked to gather at a North London park for the shoot. But less than 20 people turned up.” (History of Advertising No 90: ‘Labour isn’t working’ poster 2014) This meant that the people were just simply photographed multiple times. The dishonesty from the Conservatives enraged the Labour party. Political propaganda which smeared the opposition was completely new, which was another reason for the controversy of the poster. “Margaret Thatcher initially rejected this famous poster, telling Saatchi & Saatchi chairman Tim Bell: “You know perfectly well that you should never have the other side’s name in your own poster!”(Sam Delaney 2015) Rather than u
sing the coverage to boost their government policies they instead focused on what the other party was doing wrong. This tactic of using smear campaigning was seen frequently in the buildup to the most recent General Election.
Now the use of image manipulation and smearing the other party have been taken to new levels. One Conservative party campaign poster showed the opposition leader Corbyn, playing on the fact that Corbyn doesn’t condone nuclear weapons. This doubles as a personal attack on Corbyn, as well as his policies. The influence of individualistic phycology which has diluted politics can also be seen here “More debt higher taxes” (Figure 3) is something which will directly effect particular voters who voted for Corbyn. This poster is more likely to be targeted at wealthier voters who do not want their income to be taxed higher than it is.
However how effective is the poster in today’s society? Posters traditionally were seen on billboards and were posted through people’s letterboxes. However, with the rise of the internet politicians can now take to social media to display their propaganda, although the bigger the following the more effective the propaganda will be. On Facebook Jeremy Corbyn has 1.3 million likes as of December 2017(@JeremycorbynMP 2017) whilst May has 430,000.(@Theresamayofficial) With Corbyn evidently having more support on social media means that it will be easier for the Labour party to create propaganda which is visible to more of an audience.
Chapter 2: The influence of the Media
The tabloid newspaper known today as The Sun was founded in 1969. The previous tabloid was named ‘The Daily Herald’ (Curran & Seaton 2010) which was falling in sales, even after 1955 when it was rebranded. (Curran & Seaton2 010)
However, even after the rebranding of the newspaper, and targeting the “social radicals” (Curran & Seaton 2010) the paper’s readership continued to fall compared to its rivals such as The Daily Mail and the Daily Express. After remarketing the paper, it both lost the support of some of its old readers from before the rebranding, but also struggled to bring in a new audience. (Curran & Seaton 2010) “IPC’s market research showed that the paper failed both to please old Herald readers and to attract young, affluent, social radicals.” (Curran & Seaton 2010)
This led the paper to struggle financially, until in 1969 when it was sold to Rupert Murdoch. “In 1969, IPC sold The Sun to Rupert Murdoch for a modest sum, rumoured to be around £60,000” (The Telegraph 2000) The Sun became a newspaper for the working class. The paper changed the focus of its content, by starting to report on entertainment and TV, and also launched the famous Page 3. The Labour sided newspaper which it once was had changed. However, it’s sales had increased “The circulation figures rose impressively. The old Sun had been selling 850,000 in 1969; Lamb’s replacement reached 1.26 million within a month, 1.5 million after 100 days, and 2 million by 1971.” (The Telegraph 2000)
The Sun has been known for its controversial headlines and radical political opinion, such as the headline shown in Figure 4. The views presented by The Sun are ultimately controlled by Murdoch since he took control of the paper, which he has been able to utilise as propaganda to influence readers to vote how he wants them to.
After taking control of the paper in 1969, Murdoch appointed Sir Larry Lamb as the editor of the newspaper. The timeline of The Sun’s support of particular parties throughout the years has switched back and forth. When first taken over by Murdoch the paper remained supportive of the Labour party. “Meanwhile, Lamb had taken The Sun’s political allegiance right across the political spectrum. In 1970 it had supported Harold Wilson, albeit with reservations. In the first election of 1974 the paper supported Edward Heath; in the second it equivocated. During the Heath administration The Sun had coined the phrase “Thatcher, Milk-Snatcher”.” (The Telegraph 2000)
However, the paper then changed its support to Thatcher and the Conservative party in 1979, Urging voters to vote for Thatcher. “A Message to Labour supporters – “Vote Tory this time.” (The Telegraph 2000)
In the run up to the 1992 General Election, although Labour was slightly ahead in the polls, The Sun continued to back the Conservatives despite Thatcher’s resignation.
“From the beginning of the campaign on 11 March, the parties were neck and neck in the opinion polls, with Labour fractionally ahead. The commentators predicted a hung parliament; the only question, it seemed, was whether Labour or the Tories would be the largest party. Even the exit polls suggested a hung parliament.” (Anthony Heath 1994)
The Sun used derogatory headlines to influence readers against the Labour leader Neil Kinnock, as seen in Figure 6. The headline was a very direct attack on Kinnock, implying that a vote for Labour would have severe negative consequences for the country. In addition to this, an image of Kinnock’s head was shown inside a lightbulb, an image which stood out and made him look ridiculous.
Although in the polls a hung parliament was suggested, the Tories still a managed to grasp voters, leading to a terrible defeat for Labour “The Government had 42.8 per cent of the vote, Labour 35.2 per cent. The Tories had lost only a fraction of the vote they recorded in 1987.” (Anthony Heath 1994)
After the Conservatives won the election, The Sun then released the headline “It’s The Sun wot won it.”(Figure 5) implying that The Sun’s media influence was the reason the Conservatives managed to win unexpectedly.
This brings into question how much influence the media has over political campaigns and public opinion. Was the unexpected result of the Conservatives in 1992 due to The Sun’s media campaigning? The Sun was one of the best-selling newspapers in the UK at the time. “In 1978 The Sun overtook the Mirror to become Britain’s biggest-selling daily paper” (Torin Douglas 2004)
In addition to this, it also appealed to working class readers, who were generally swing voters in the election. Even Kinnock himself said in his Labour resignation speech that the media had a role to play in the Conservatives winning the election “As the election process opens, I have only one piece of advice for the Labour movement at every level: do not feed and do not believe the press and broadcasting media in their reporting of these events.” (Kinnock 1992)
However, the next Labour leader Tony Blair managed to get the support of The Sun, who encouraged the masses to support him as well.
“On 17 March 1997, John Major, the incumbent Conservative Prime Minister, announced that the general election would be held on 1 May. The unusually long notice, six weeks, would he hoped give him time
to improve his apparently hopeless position in the opinion polls. Yet within hours his hopes of a morale-boosting lift-off were devastated. For the next morning, The Sun, Britain’s best-selling national daily paper, announced that it was backing Labour.” (J.Curtice 1999) Again, the candidate backed by The Sun won. However, The Sun was not the only paper who changed to support Blair. Unlike in past elections, the right wing press changed their support from Conservative to Labour, which could have influenced their readers to vote the same way. Readers will pick papers which sit within their views QUOTE EVIDENCE. So in 1997 when the newspapers decided to support Labour, this meant that Conservative voting readers that have faith in the newspaper they read were influenced to vote for Labour.
“But if newspapers change their message, as happened in the 1997 British election, then their readers cannot be considered to carry the legacy of past persuasion. In short, if newspapers can influence votes, then the one occasion on which we should be able to see their influence is when a paper changes sides” (J. Curtis 1999)
It is evident that since Murdoch has taken over The Sun, the political party that they support often wins the election. This suggests that either The Sun has substantial influence on the readers of the paper, or simply that The Sun choose the particular party to support based on their popularity and who is most likely to win. When the right wing press changed their support for Labour in 1997, rather than the newspapers influencing the voters, could the newspapers simply have supported the party due to the readers showing their support for Blair?
Studies have also been done which show that readers also acknowledge that the media has been filtered and manipulated “Nimmo and combs propose that the majority of Americans now accept as normal the fact that they are confined to encountering politics as a set of second-hand (manipulated and distorted) media images.” (Eric louw) Meaning that if the readers are aware of this the papers political information will have little influence on them.
In the 2017 election, the newspapers each chose to support a political party and used their platform as a means of influence. The papers that once supported Blair continued to support Conservative as they had with David Cameron, and like the headlines with Kinnock, The Sun wrote derogatory headlines about Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour party leader.
Here the headline reads “Cor-bin”, a personal attack on Corbyn, similar to slanders The Sun had previously used towards Kinnock. Photo manipulation is used to make Corbyn look ridiculous by editing an unflattering image of him to appear inside of a wheelie bin, damaging the readers’ opinion of him and making them less inclined to vote for him.
Although Theresa May still won the election, there was a hung parliament, something which was not expected until the polls, even the day before the conservatives were still ahead “But the polls suggest it could be anywhere between a one and 12-point Conservative lead”.(BBC 2017) Before this, the polls had been predicting a clear Conservative win since the election was announced “Tory support was already rising to above 45 per cent before she did so.” (John Rentoul 2017) It is possible that despite being historically right-wing, some papers could have only backed May due to her popularity at the start of the election campaign, which soon started to diminish.
During the 2017 General Election, it can be seen from YouGov’s graph of the percentage of votes split by newspaper readership (FIGURE 9) that people were likely to vote how the newspaper they read wants them to. The more right wing the newspaper, the more Conservative the reader. Unlike the 1997 General Election where right-wings papers went against their usual political views to encourage readers to vote for Blair, the newspapers were making content that the readers wanted to hear.
The newspapers may not have been as influential in the 2017 Election as they have been in the past because of the rise of social media. Social media is defined as “Websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.” (Oxford dictionary 2017)
Social media has created a completely new way of communicating the news, exposing people to politics who would previously stay away from it. New media has developed throughout the 20th and 21st century such as radio and television, but the internet has bought a whole new means of communication, due the interactivity of being able to connect and share information all around the world instantly. The popularity of social media means that images and information can be spread to a large audience extremely quickly. “Facebook, launched in 2004, has now reached 1.4 billion active monthly users worldwide, Twitter, started in 2006, currently has 288 million monthly active users posting 500 million tweets daily” (Obar & Wildman2015) However the nature of social media means that anyone is able to post content meaning there is a lack of control in what information is posted which is not the case with traditional news. “The raw material of news must pass through successive filters, leaving only the cleansed residue fit to print. They fix the premises of discourse and interpretation, and the definition of what is newsworthy in the first place, and they explain the basis and operations of what amount to propaganda campaigns.” (Herman & Chomsky 1988)
Social media has created a platform where content is controlled by everyone, not just traditional news sources. In the build-up to the American presidential election in 2016, it was evident that social media can be used in politics to win over voters in a completely new way.
The 2016 election was won by Donald Trump, a businessman and television personality. Trump’s controversial radical right-wing views lead to a lot of media attention, but the role of social media also had a part to play in Trump’s popularity.
Trump managed to change the way in which people follow the media with the term fake news. Social media allows politicians to speak and communicate without any forms of control or filter from the media. He used this personal connection to his followers to challenge some of the negative press that he was getting, which most politicians just accept. He managed to use the term to play down any bad publicity against himself in the traditional media. “@CNN is in a total meltdown with their FAKE NEWS because their ratings are tanking since election and their credibility will soon be gone!” (Donald Trump 2017) As the mainstream media were largely against Trump, the use of the fake news catchphrase and the direct, unfiltered communication to his followers through Twitter meant that he was able to fight back and discredit them.
Like Trump Corbyn was also displayed negatively in the media. However, he was on the other side of the spectrum to Trump due to his left wing ideologies. Although Corbyn was portrayed badly in the media, he was popular on social media and online forums. Showing the support for Corbyn on social media is far stronger. The popularity for Corbyn on social media also correlates with the divide between the age groups between the Conservative and Labour parties. Shown in Figure 1, Shows clearly that Labour is more desirable for the younger generation, the older the voter the more likely they are to vote conservative. Could the influence of the mainstream media have more of an impact on older generations, whilst social media creates new forms of communication and creates a different point of view, meaning voters have more information to decide who to vote for? Or could this show that because of
social media, it is easier for information and trends to circulate, thus meaning that Corbyn could just simply be a trend which the younger voters decided to endorse and support to fit into a crowd.
Trump managed to use the amount of media attention he got and to his advantage with his right wing views which caused a large amount of negative attention. Adam Curtis simply described it as “Angry people click” (Hypernormalisation 2016). Meaning his controversial statements lead him to dilute social media with Trump leading to a surge in his popularity.
Social media also creates what is known as an Echo Chamber. “As the intelligence systems online gathered evermore data, new forms of guidance began to emerge. Social media created filters, complex algorithms that looked at what individuals liked, and then fed more of the same back to them.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016) Social media is designed to only see content which the user likes, for example on Instagram and Twitter you choose who you follow and what content to see, and on Reddit you subscribe to forums which you are interested in meaning users only ever view content that they want to see. “The liberals were outraged by Trump. But they expressed their anger in cyberspace, so it had no effect because the algorithms made sure that they only spoke to people that agreed with them.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016) This means that users only follow others who agree with their political beliefs, meaning that no one ever challenges these beliefs leaving no room for social change. “In the process, individuals began to move without realising it into bubbles that isolated them from enormous amounts of other information.” “(Hypernormalisation 2016)
The creation on the company Cambridge Analyitica has also been able to use algorithms to influence social media users. There is evidence that Cambridge Analytica are able to build up a detailed profile of individuals based on their social media likes, their followers, their circles, and use algorithms to determine their political views. From this they could identify Persuadable voters, and target them with propaganda specific to them. “Finding persuadable voters is key for any campaign and with its treasure trove of data, Cambridge Analytica could target people high in neuroticism, for example, with images of immigrants “swamping” the country. The key is finding emotional triggers for each individual voter.”(Carole Cadwalladr 2017)