2010: The Year Politics Became Sexy
Who is your celebrity crush? Brad Pitt?
David Beckham? It may (or may not) surprise you that 10,000 women placed David
Cameron as the 92nd sexiest man in the world following a poll by New
Woman magazine, putting him ahead of internationally renowned hotties including
Russell Crowe and James Blunt. This sex appeal is all too evident in the
official advertisement released by the Tories in 2010 as part of Cameron’s
(successful) electoral campaign. A clean-cut, airbrushed Cameron is certainly
the focal point of this image. But why did this advert really help Cameron win the election? It
can’t just be down to those 10,000 women who saw it and thought it would be ‘fun’ to have
some eye candy back in number 10... Taking into account the writings of Pratkanis
(2007) and Cialdini (2001), one reason to explain Cameron’s campaign success appears
in the form of Social Proof. Cameron
created a social relationship between himself and the electorate, enabling him
to influence their vote. He did this by using these adverts to make himself appear as a credible
source who knew what he was talking about, and could be trusted (whether
this remains to be true now is irrelevant). This means that all voters
out there, (naturally) wanting to be correct in their decision, could place their
trust in this man and assume his view, especially if they had no idea what they were voting for,
politically. He appeared to know what he was talking about, and this was enough
for us. This led to compliance; thus, more votes for gorgeous, trustworthy
Cameron.
But any political leader could do this, so
what sets him apart? “We can’t go on like this” highlights the mistakes made by
the current party in power, and therefore discredits his opposition as sources,
placing Cameron on an even higher pedestal of prestige. Now everyone admires
him, some even want to be him so, given this preferential treatment, his power
of persuasion increases. He has achieved avoidant miscasting; Cameron has set
himself apart from the negative opinions of fellow politicians and paints
himself in a positive light, similarly shown in a study by Cooper & Jones (1969), where people changed their beliefs to prevent
appearing like an obnoxious confederate.
He proved he knows his stuff and outplayed his opponents in the process. But more needed to be done. Cameron
therefore set about increasing his “Plain Folk” image. In a time of financial
turmoil, many may turn their nose up at a Public School educated leader with no
belief in the state system. Thus in November 2012, he announced that he intended to send his offspring to state schools. We are more likely to be influenced by those we consider similar to ourselves
(Brock, 1965; Berscheid, 1966), so by appearing to be just like ‘us’, Cameron
has secured another area of persuasion. Thus, a focus on saving the NHS, a system designed for the electorate, plays on this
idea of him being like us; what is important to us, is important to him. Perhaps he even uses the NHS.
Cameron has worked hard to persuade us to
vote for him. But regardless of this, it can’t be taken for granted how much
easier it is to watch Prime Minister’s Question when it involves the 92nd
sexiest man in the world.
By Louise Lee
Berscheid, E. (1966). Opinion change and communicator-communicatee
similarity and dissimilarity. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 670-680
Brock, T. C. (1965). Communicator-recipient similarity and decision
change. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 1, 650-654
Caildini, R. B. (2001). Influence.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Cooper. J., & Jones, E. E. (1969). Opinion divergence as a strategy
to avoid being miscast. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 23-30
Pratkanis, A. R. (2007). The
Science of Social Influence. NY & East Sussex: Psychology Press
Interesting, im not sure about the social proof thing as that would require us to follow the behavior of other people, but his authority definitely would have had an impact.
ReplyDelete