The prevalence of these techniques,

The prevalence of these techniques, which are now routinely used by all
parties, has generated debate within the journalistic profession about the
extent to which, by allowing the politicians to flood the campaign environment with pseudo-events of this kind, they are contributing to the degradation of political culture and the manipulation of the audience.
6
As a result,
recent election campaigns have witnessed journalists adopting a considerably
more sceptical approach to the pseudo-event. Political coverage now
frequently includes, not merely an account of the event, but a critique – metacoverage – of its status as an event and how it has been covered. In the case
of Labour’s Sheffield rally, as already noted, this meta-discourse became
seriously critical. Today, politicians construct their pseudo-events in ways
which acknowledge their ‘constructedness’.
All political news management, indeed, now operates in a context of
ongoing journalistic commentary about the ‘game’ of politics (McNair,
2000). Journalists are aware of the efforts made to influence their coverage,
and include analysis of these efforts as part of their reportage. Political
journalism, as a result, is increasingly focused on matters of process rather
than policy, on the hidden meanings behind the surface appearance of
political events. Some observers are critical of this ‘relentless emphasis on the
cynical game of politics’ (Fallows, 1996, p. 31), warning that it diverts the
citizens’ attention from the ‘real issues’. The then Labour Home Secretary
Jack Straw, for example, criticised ‘the quality of political journalism’ in
Britain at the height of the ‘cash-for-contracts’ scandal in 1998. In this case,
the Observernewspaper reported that lobbyists associated with the Labour
government (and at least one, Roger Liddle, in its employ at the time) were
selling their (claimed) privileged access to business clients. This kind of
‘process’ journalism, argued Straw, was squeezing substantive coverage of
policy out of the media, to be replaced by trivia. On the other hand – and
the frantic efforts of the Labour leadership to discredit the Observerstory
when it broke in July 1998 might be thought to reinforce this point –
journalistic monitoring and deconstruction of the political process, including
the behind-the-scenes efforts of the lobbyists (see below), are arguably the
citizens’ best defence against the increasingly sophisticated efforts of the
politicians and their media advisers to create favourable media images of
their clients.
Finally, under the category of media management, we turn to the news
conference, in which political actors make public statements before
audiences of journalists, which are then transmitted by print and broadcast
media to the wider citizenry. News conferences present politicians with
opportunities to set media agendas and thus influence public debate during
election campaigns, as in the routine pursuit of politics between elections.
POLITICAL PUBLIC RELATIONS
131
Since Pierre Salinger first persuaded John Kennedy to give live television
news conferences in the early 1960s they have become a presidential
institution in the US. Trading, once again, on the inherent newsworthiness
of presidential utterances and of reportable soundbites and pictures,
presidents seek to impose theirreading of events on the political environment
by having it reported at the top of the main news bulletins. Hart’s booklength study of presidential rhetoric notes that
the presidency has been transferred from a formal, print-oriented
world into an electronic environment specialising in the spoken
word and rewarding casual, interpersonally adept politicians. . . .
Presidents and their staff [have] become expert in [the sociology of
persuasion], and much of their time is devoted to discovering the
best social superstructure for insuring that a given rhetorical event
will proceed smoothly and persuasively.
(1987, p. 61)
In Britain during recent election campaigns each party has begun its day
with a news conference, setting out its ‘theme’ of the day and the issues on
which it hopes to compete with opponents. Thus, in 1997 Labour had a
‘health’ day, the Tories a ‘tax’ day and the Liberal Democrats a ‘proportional
representation’ day. By setting out the issues in this way early in the campaign day, each party hoped to dominate the media agenda with coverage
which would highlight (and favour) its policies, while casting a poor light on
those of the opposition.
In general, news conferences are designed with a view to maximising
coverage. Hence, they will be put on in time to be reported on key news
bulletins and at locations accessible to journalists. None of which ensures,
of course, that coverage willbe favourable. The débâcle of ‘Jennifer’s Ear’
(see Chapter 6), when the Labour Party’s attempt to set the 1992 campaign
agenda on health turned into a debate about ethics and manipulation which
challenged the party’s integrity (as it did that of the Conservatives), involved
a series of news conferences in which spokespersons sought to reclaim the
initiative, largely without success. As Butler and Kavanagh observe
the way in which the war of Jennifer’s ear captured the agenda was
the most extraordinary episode in the campaign on the air, explicable only in terms of the mounting frustration amongst journalists
at a boring campaign and the intensity of news management by the
parties. Frustrations boiled over, news management collapsed, the
ratpack soared off out of control, scenting a ‘real’ story at last, and
both parties and broadcasters lurched off course.
(1992, p. 164)
COMMUNICATING POLITICS
132
At news conferences tears were shed, tempers lost, and recriminations made
as Labour sought unsuccessfully to bring the media’s agenda back into line
with its own.
Despite the dangers inherent in using ‘free media’, the newsworthiness of
live television interviews and debates ensures that no party leader or head of
government can refuse to participate in them to some degree. To minimise
the risks politicians employ public relations professionals, whose job it is to
attempt to ensure that the interpretation of a speaker’s words (or gaffes) is
a convenient and desirable one. These ‘spin doctors’ seek to shape the
journalistic agenda in making sense of their employers’ discourse. This they
may do by issuing press releases clarifying ambiguous or contradictory
remarks, having quiet words with key journalists and pundits or giving news
conferences. Leading politicians will also employ the services of ‘minders’,
who manage the details of media encounters and attempt to anticipate and
neutralise risks. In Britain, following the rise of Tony Blair and the election
of Labour to government, the most famous (and infamous) of these became
Alistair Campbell, the new Prime Minister’s press secretary. Campbell did in
government what he had done in opposition – seduced, cajoled, harried and
intimidated the media from behind the scenes into giving his leader the best
possible coverage in any given circumstances. Spokespersons, on the other
hand, literally speak for the politician in public. In the US the presidential
spokesman or woman has a key role in maintaining daily contact between
the president, the media and the public. Where the president may give a news
conference weekly, monthly, or less frequently, the spokesperson provides a
constant flow of soundbites which are assumed to be authoritative. When
George Stepanopolous or Dee Dee Myers spoke to US journalists about
Clinton administration policy, the journalists knew they were receiving the
presidential perspective on events. Even when presidents and other political
figures make personal appearances at a news conference, rally or other event,
the words they speak are usually not their own but those of a speech-writer
who will attempt to present the desired message in a media-friendly form,
with sufficiently snappy soundbites.
Image management
The supply by politicians of structured news events for the purposes of
maximising favourable media coverage is accompanied by a heightened
concern with image: the personal image of political actors on the one hand
and the corporate image of the party on the other. In the area of personal
image, modern politicians are judged not only by what they say and do, but
howthey say and do it. In short, political stylenow counts for almost as
much as substance. One could argue that this has always been an important
factor in political success, and that leaders from George Washington
onwards have consciously presented ‘images’ to their constituencies. As with
POLITICAL PUBLIC RELATIONS
133
so much that is part of political communication, however, it is in the postSecond World War period, in the course of which television has become the
predominant mass medium, that considerations of style have emerged as
central to the political process.
Brendan Bruce argues that in modern Britain, where the policies of the
competing parties have gradually become more alike, image has taken on
added importance as a distinguishing feature. ‘When the parties’ ideological
centres of gravity are converging rather than diverging, personality is likely
to become a more important way for the voter to determine credibility’
(1992, p. 95).
In Michael Cockerell’s view, the first British Prime Minister successfully
to project a TV image was Harold Macmillan, who pioneered the use of the
tele-prompter, thus enabling him to address audiences with a naturalness of
style which his predecessors like Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee
could not achieve. His successor as Prime Minister, Alec Douglas-Home, was
in Cockerell’s opinion unsuited for television, coming across as patrician and
aloof. Labour’s leader at this time, Harold Wilson, on the other hand,
presented a populist, approachable image, which helped him to win and hold
on to political power for much of

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Prevalensi teknik ini, yang sekarang secara rutin digunakan oleh semuapihak, telah menghasilkan perdebatan dalam profesi jurnalistik tentangsejauh mana, dengan memungkinkan politisi untuk banjir kampanye lingkungan dengan pseudo acara semacam ini, mereka berkontribusi terhadap degradasi budaya politik dan manipulasi penonton.6Akibatnya,kampanye pemilihan kemarin telah menyaksikan wartawan mengadopsi jauhpendekatan yang lebih skeptis untuk acara pseudo. Liputan politik sekarangsering mencakup bukan hanya account dari acara, tapi kritik-metacoverage-statusnya sebagai suatu peristiwa dan bagaimana ia telah dibahas. Dalam kasusTenaga di rally Sheffield, sebagaimana telah disebutkan, meta-wacana ini menjadiserius kritis. Hari ini, politisi membangun kegiatan mereka pseudo carayang mengakui mereka 'constructedness'.Semua berita politik manajemen, memang, sekarang beroperasi dalam konteksberkelanjutan jurnalistik komentar tentang 'permainan' politik (McNair,2000). wartawan sadar upaya yang dilakukan untuk mempengaruhi cakupan mereka,dan mencakup analisis dari upaya ini sebagai bagian dari reportase mereka. Politikjurnalisme, sebagai akibatnya, semakin berfokus pada masalah-masalah proses agakdari kebijakan, makna tersembunyi di balik penampilan permukaanperistiwa politik. Beberapa pengamat kritis ini ' tanpa henti penekanan padaPermainan sinis politik ' (Fallows, 1996, hal. 31), peringatan bahwa itu mengalihkanwarga negara perhatian dari masalah nyata. Kemudian Sekretaris Buruh rumahJack Straw, misalnya, dikritik 'kualitas politik jurnalisme' diBritain pada ketinggian skandal 'uang tunai-untuk-kontrak' pada tahun 1998. Dalam kasus ini,Observernewspaper melaporkan bahwa pelobi terkait dengan tenaga kerjapemerintah (dan setidaknya satu, Roger misal: Liddle, dalam mempekerjakan yang saat itu)menjual akses istimewa mereka (diklaim) klien bisnis. Semacam ini dari'proses' jurnalisme, berpendapat jerami, yang meremas cakupan substantifkebijakan dari media, akan digantikan oleh hal-hal sepele. Di sisi lain- danupaya panik kepemimpinan buruh untuk mendiskreditkan ObserverstoryKetika itu pecah Juli 1998 mungkin berpikir untuk memperkuat titik ini-pemantauan jurnalistik dan dekonstruksi proses politik, termasukupaya behind-the-scenes pelobi (Lihat di bawah), yang boleh dibilangwarga negara pertahanan terbaik terhadap upaya semakin canggihpolitisi dan penasihat media mereka untuk menciptakan gambar media menguntungkanklien mereka.Akhirnya, di bawah kategori media manajemen, kita beralih ke beritakonferensi, di mana aktor politik membuat pernyataan publik sebelumaudiens dari wartawan, yang kemudian ditransmisikan oleh cetak dan siaranmedia untuk warga lebih luas. Konferensi berita politisi hadir dengankesempatan untuk mengatur agenda media dan dengan demikian mempengaruhi debat publik selamakampanye pemilihan, seperti mengejar rutin politik antara pemilu.POLITIK HUBUNGAN MASYARAKAT131Karena Pierre Salinger pertama membujuk John Kennedy untuk memberikan siaran langsungBerita konferensi di awal 1960-an yang mereka telah menjadi Presidenlembaga di Amerika Serikat. Perdagangan, sekali lagi, pada newsworthiness melekatucapan-ucapan Presiden dan dilaporkan soundbites dan gambar,Presiden berusaha untuk memaksakan theirreading peristiwa lingkungan politikoleh karena itu dilaporkan di bagian atas buletin berita utama. Studi booklength Hart Presiden retorika mencatat bahwaPresiden telah ditransfer dari formal, berorientasi cetakdunia menjadi lingkungan elektronik yang mengkhususkan diri dalam lisankata dan bermanfaat politisi kasual, interpersonal mahir....Presiden dan staf mereka [memiliki] menjadi ahli dalam [Sosiologipersuasi], dan banyak waktu mereka dikhususkan untuk menemukanterbaik sosial suprastruktur untuk mengasuransikan bahwa suatu acara retorisakan berjalan dengan lancar dan persuasif.(1987, ms. 61)Di Britania selama kampanye pemilihan hari masing-masing pihak telah mulai haridengan konferensi pers, menetapkan 'tema' hari dan isu-isu padayang ia berharap untuk bersaing dengan lawan. Dengan demikian, pada tahun 1997 memiliki tenaga kerja'Kesehatan' hari, Tories 'pajak' sehari dan Liberal Demokrat ' proporsionalrepresentasi ' hari. Dengan masalah-masalah dalam cara ini di pagi hari kampanye, masing-masing pihak berharap untuk mendominasi agenda media dengan cakupanyang akan menyorot (dan mendukung) dengan kebijakan, sementara casting miskin cahaya padaorang-orang dari oposisi.Secara umum, konferensi berita dirancang dengan tujuan untuk memaksimalkancakupan. Oleh karena itu, mereka akan diletakkan di dalam waktu akan dilaporkan kunci BeritaBuletin dan di lokasi-lokasi yang mudah diakses oleh wartawan. Tidak ada yang menjamin,Tentu saja, yang cakupan akan menguntungkan. Débâcle 'Jennifer telinga'(Lihat Bab 6), ketika partai buruh upaya untuk mengatur kampanye 1992agenda pada kesehatan berubah menjadi perdebatan tentang etika dan manipulasi yangmenantang Partai integritas (seperti itu yang konservatif) terlibatserangkaian Berita konferensi di mana juru bicara berusaha untuk merebut kembaliinisiatif, sebagian besar tanpa keberhasilan. Seperti Butler dan Kavanagh mengamaticara di mana perang Jennifer telinga ditangkap agendaepisode yang paling luar biasa dalam kampanye di udara, dijelaskan hanya dalam hal pemasangan frustrasi antara wartawankampanye yang membosankan dan intensitas manajemen Berita olehpihak. Frustrasi yang direbus di atas, Berita manajemen runtuh,ratpack melonjak dari lepas kendali, scenting cerita 'real' terakhir dankedua belah pihak dan penyiar meluncur tentu.(1992, mukasurat 164)KOMUNIKASI POLITIK132Pada konferensi berita air mata adalah gudang, emosi yang hilang dan saling tuduh yang dibuatsebagai pekerja dicari gagal untuk membawa media agenda kembali ke barisdengan sendiri.Meskipun bahaya yang melekat dalam menggunakan 'gratis media', newsworthiness dariLive televisi Wawancara dan perdebatan memastikan bahwa tidak ada pemimpin partai atau kepalapemerintah dapat menolak untuk berpartisipasi di dalamnya untuk beberapa derajat. Untuk meminimalkanpara politisi risiko mempekerjakan humas profesional, yang tugasnya untukmencoba untuk memastikan bahwa interpretasi dari kata-kata seorang pembicara (atau gaffes) yang nyaman dan diinginkan. 'Dokter spin' ini berusaha untuk bentukjurnalistik agenda dalam membuat rasa wacana majikan mereka. Ini merekadapat melakukannya dengan mengeluarkan siaran pers mengklarifikasi ambigu atau bertentanganKomentar, memiliki kata-kata yang tenang dengan kunci wartawan dan para pakar atau memberikan Beritakonferensi. Politisi terkemuka juga akan menggunakan jasa 'minders',yang mengelola rincian pertemuan media dan mencoba untuk mengantisipasi danmenetralkan risiko. Di Britania, setelah munculnya Tony Blair dan pemilihanburuh pemerintah, yang paling terkenal (dan terkenal) ini menjadiAlistair Campbell, Sekretaris pers Perdana Menteri baru. Campbell lakukan diPemerintah apa yang telah dilakukannya dalam oposisi – tergoda, cajoled, cucian danterintimidasi media dari balik layar ke memberikan pemimpin nya yang terbaikmungkin cakupan dalam keadaan tertentu. Juru bicara, di sisi laintangan, harfiah berbicara bagi politisi tersebut di depan umum. Di Amerika Serikat Presidenjuru bicara atau wanita memiliki peran utama dalam mempertahankan kontak sehari-hari antaraPresiden, media dan publik. Dimana Presiden mungkin memberikan BeritaKonferensi mingguan, bulanan, atau kurang sering, juru bicara menyediakanaliran konstan soundbites yang diasumsikan otoritatif. KapanGeorge Stepanopolous atau Dee Dee Myers berbicara kepada wartawan AS tentangKebijakan pemerintah Clinton, wartawan tahu mereka menerimaPresiden perspektif pada peristiwa. Bahkan ketika Presiden dan politikangka membuat penampilan pribadi di konferensi pers, reli atau acara lainnya,kata-kata yang mereka berbicara yang biasanya tidak sendiri tetapi orang-orang dari penulis pidatoyang akan mencoba untuk menyajikan pesan yang diinginkan dalam bentuk media-ramah,dengan soundbites cukup tajam.Manajemen gambarPasokan oleh politisi terstruktur berita acara untuk tujuanmemaksimalkan liputan media menguntungkan disertai oleh meningkatnyakeprihatinan dengan gambar: gambar pribadi aktor politik di satu sisidan citra perusahaan Partai pada yang lain. Di daerah pribadiGambar, politisi modern yang dinilai tidak hanya dengan apa yang mereka katakan dan lakukan, tapihowthey mengatakan dan melakukannya. Singkatnya, politik stylenow penting untuk hampir sebagaisebanyak substansi. Satu dapat membantah bahwa ini selalu pentingfaktor dalam kesuksesan politik, dan bahwa para pemimpin dari George Washingtondan seterusnya sadar disajikan 'gambar' untuk konstituen mereka. Seperti denganPOLITIK HUBUNGAN MASYARAKAT133so much that is part of political communication, however, it is in the postSecond World War period, in the course of which television has become thepredominant mass medium, that considerations of style have emerged ascentral to the political process.Brendan Bruce argues that in modern Britain, where the policies of thecompeting parties have gradually become more alike, image has taken onadded importance as a distinguishing feature. ‘When the parties’ ideologicalcentres of gravity are converging rather than diverging, personality is likelyto become a more important way for the voter to determine credibility’(1992, p. 95).In Michael Cockerell’s view, the first British Prime Minister successfullyto project a TV image was Harold Macmillan, who pioneered the use of thetele-prompter, thus enabling him to address audiences with a naturalness ofstyle which his predecessors like Winston Churchill and Clement Attleecould not achieve. His successor as Prime Minister, Alec Douglas-Home, wasin Cockerell’s opinion unsuited for television, coming across as patrician andaloof. Labour’s leader at this time, Harold Wilson, on the other hand,presented a populist, approachable image, which helped him to win and holdon to political power for much of