Why Negative Campaigning Works

 

Jonathan Upton

 

email

print

Also in this section:

• Building local coalitions David Canzini
• How Boris Won: The Lynton Crosby Interview Iain Dale
• Ten ways to improve a speech John Shosky
• From Facebook to ballot box Jag Singh
• Campaign doctor Christian Schnee
• Learning Lessons from Crewe and Nantwich

Ever gone negative in a campaign? It's something the public and politicians all say they hate, but it’s the political equivalent of a guilty pleasure.

 

Boris Johnson is a ‘buffoon’, the Conservative candidate in Crewe and Nantwich is a ‘Toff’, Tony Blair is the ‘devil’. Hardly compelling evidence of successful negative approaches, but it would be a mistake to conclude negative campaigning does not work, after all the public have an appetite for it. In politics people often support what they least hate and a quick tour of the political blogosphere shows how popular knocking your opponent is.

 

Any successful political campaign needs to have a believable and emotionally compelling narrative underpinning it. Every coherent story needs a hero determined to do good deeds, but it also needs a villain; a dragon to slay. Any political narrative that does not have both will fail. 

 

Importantly the narrative must be told by people who have authenticity. It should define the candidate and what they stand for, but it must also define what they are not. Accordingly the narrative must also define your opponents. 

 

We are not talking about gutter politics, scrabbling in bins for evidence of embarrassing indiscretion, yet the story must be a coherent one which resonates. Even when a campaign is selling itself on being positive, it is also by implication attacking those who would dare to stray into the negative. 

The Labour government tried to tell a story about their opponents – Cameron is a posh Etonian, he’s a flip-flopper, a chameleon, a cutter of public services and economically illiterate. But the problem is the lack of overall coherence, a failure to present a compelling and balanced Labour narrative. It doesn’t communicate what the Labour government is doing, or wants to do, or set itself apart form what a Cameron government would do given the opportunity. Additionally, large elements of the narrative simply do not resonate, they appear to be delivered in utilitarian Whitehall speak and are simply not believable anymore.

 

Negative campaigning is not the be all or end all of a campaign. However it is a necessary part of any political toolkit. In order to define and publicise your positives you need to contrast them with the less positive aspects of your opponent. It shouldn’t be complicated – but if your story is not compelling and is not believable people will not listen.  So the answer to the question ‘does negative campaigning work’, is ‘yes it does’, but it needs to be a part of a bigger story.

 

Those who attack others for campaigning negatively are merely telling their story and rather prove the point.

 

Jonathan Upton is the Managing Director of The Campaign Company