Political Campaigning

There is a lot of talk about the “Americanization of electoral campaigns”, trying to define in that way a certain international uniformity in the electoral logic throughout the world. Not infrequently, the term is used with a certain contemptuous tone, arguing that the same techniques of persuasion and image management used to sell mass consumption products, would have displaced the ideologies. In a way Margaret Thatcher was right when she warned that “selling” the ideas of a politician was not the same as selling a soap, and her warning was, in that sense, aimed at opposing the new model that was already looming on the horizon. An electoral campaign model  universalized, which includes the personalization of the contest, with candidates more important than their parties, much political marketing and the use of mass media, especially television and social networks, as main channels of dissemination.

It refers more to the conditions that made this “Americanization” possible than to those who acted as a vehicle for transmitting that expertise. I met two of them: Bill Hamilton and Joe Napolitan. The first for having been my beloved teacher in the masters in campaigns at the University of Florida, the second for having worked closely with who was one of its main clients for almost a decade. Both were pioneers in the “export” of American-style political consulting techniques.

The certain thing is that the electoral campaigns went turning into processes every day more complex and the globalization of the campaigns also implies a greater professionalization of the same. Sophisticated campaigns, involving experts in logistics, communications, fundraising, powerful databases and measurement of public opinion. Also experts in political strategy, such as Hamilton and Napolitan, two pioneers of internationalization that began in the 70s: Hamilton in Europe, with the Swedish Social Democracy, and Napolitan in Latin America, with the Venezuelan social democracy.

Venezuela was a pioneer country in the region in the application of political marketing techniques. Probably for being also the country of the region pioneer in democratic struggles, and facilitated by the geographic proximity with the United States, combined with the abundance of petrodollars, factors that propitiated conditions so that the new techniques of political marketing would anchor in the country. Its beginnings seem to be clearly placed in the campaign of 1973, when the then Social-Democratic candidate, Carlos Andrés Pérez, competed with the Christian Democrat Lorenzo Fernández. Great figures of the North American political consultancy went through that contest, those already mentioned Joe Napolitan and Bill Hamilton, but also people like David Garth and George Gaithier, among others. To a large extent, their work in those parts validated a certain degree of universality of the concepts, techniques and strategies used to lead and win elections, which had been used in the United States for a decade. Years later, the universalization ofAmerican style of campaigning also in the rest of our continent, as well as in Europe, Asia and even Africa. In the future, all the campaigns would use the most modern techniques and advances in these areas.

Napolitan and Hamilton were good friends and related ideologically. Together they were founders of the AAPC, acronym in English of the North American Association of Political Consultancy. Both presided over the association that they founded, in different periods. Today the AAPC is a multiparty organization of political and public affairs professionals dedicated to improving democracy. With more than 1,350 members from all corners of the globe, it is the largest association of political and public affairs professionals in the world.

Joseph Napolitan was a political consultant since 1956 and is considered a “father” of the discipline. He was the first person included in the AAPC Hall of Fame for political consultants. Napolitan is the author of The Election Game , considered a basic text on management and strategy of political campaigns, and almost an object of worship. He also wrote 100 things that I have learned in 30 years as a political consultant, written in 1986, is an essential guide of full force, that even today my students enjoy enormously. Napolitan was part of the campaign staff of President John F. Kennedy and President Lyndon B. Johnson, and was media director for Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey in the 1968 presidential election. He was a personal adviser to nine foreign heads of state, among them the president Valery Giscard d’Estaing, of France; President Jaime Lusinchi and President Carlos Andrés Pérez of Venezuela; President Gaafar Nimieri of Sudan; Prime Minister Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam of Mauritius; and President Oscar Arias, from Costa Rica. On one occasion, after his intense work as a political consultant in Venezuela and Central America, an American magazine interviewed him, asking what was the main difference of being a political consultant in those countries in relation to the United States. “There the campaigns are in Spanish,” he answered with irreverent naivety.

I am proud to say that William Hamilton, considered one of the pioneers in opinion research in the public sector worldwide, was the one who encouraged me to found DataStrategia. Bill was one of the first professionals to apply technological tools, such as survey research and focus groups, in the development of ideas and messages in politics, corporate image and public education campaigns. Many of the public opinion research standards currently used in the industry were designed by his firm, H & S. He was a pollster for President Carter in the United States. Outside the United States, he acted as a principal consultant in numerous winning campaigns in 22 countries. In 1994 he won an award as “International Consultant of the Year”. Bill was not only an extraordinary professional, but a teacher among teachers. I greatly enjoyed his classes during two semesters in the masters in campaigns of the University of Florida, where we formed a very privileged group of only six students. Permanent promoter of ethical standards in politics and campaigns, his life was enormously inspiring and I think I am very fortunate to have received his teachings.

At the end of 1997 we were discussing a project in the patio of my house in Caracas. My old professor Bill Hamilton was already ill with cancer, but he had been hired by the Venezuelan government to conduct a study on democratic values. We did not know it then, but we lived the prelude to the end of Venezuelan democracy. In one of the recesses his colleague Napolitan came up and I showed him some documents that I keep with great zeal in my collection of interesting papers: a wide series of memoranda by Napolitan for President Lusinchi, for President Carlos Andrés Pérez, for the president Oscar Arias, as well as documents of geopolitical analysis of the region dated around the 80’s. Needless to say, the file ended the work session and became an exciting review session of recent history.

As a whole, all those memos, which one day I will turn into a book, synthesize the basic essence of a political consultant: someone who understands the logic of political communication, the agenda of the issues and public opinion, and applies his skills during an election campaign.

I share with the readers a memorandum that I consider particularly relevant for the moment in which the Latin American region lives. I hope you enjoy it.

In 1985, Napolitan wrote a memo to President Lusinchi about the best ways to attract foreign investment to Venezuela. There he asserts that there are two determining factors to achieve it: political stability and democratic government. These were the two elements most valued by American business executives at that time and probably continue to be so. In this, Napolitan identifies a very important comparative advantage for Venezuela in the Latin American subregion: a stable democratic government. “It is enough to see Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Peru and other Latin American countries to realize how solid and stable their government is”. It was true and Venezuela was, during those decades, not only a leader of sub-regional democracy, but also a very active promoter of its values ​​throughout the Latin American territory. Today, when the situation has turned 180 degrees, it is necessary to insist on the necessary reciprocity, but also to warn of the risks with a sentence that Napolitan himself could have written: “Never take democracy for granted”.  

Carmen Beatriz Fernández chairs the DataStrategia consultancy and is a professor of political communication at the University of Navarra (@ carmenbeat )