The political dynamics and governance of the United States in recent years have been highly intriguing. What has happened in America is straightforward for the general public or those who are apolitical. Numerous valuable lessons can be learned from the country’s communication aspects related to public affairs.
The United States is renowned for its expertise in designing and implementing public communication campaigns on any topic. The communication and public relations field was born in this country and has rapidly evolved there.
Unsurprisingly, the United States has become one of the most popular destinations for studying this field. However, the reputation and trust in the United States have been tarnished due to its communication experiments, which have resulted in a significant blunder.
“The Obama Style”
If we look back at the Obama administration, the world was initially impressed by the reputation he built. His cabinet and team’s narratives were generally positive, data-driven, balanced, and transparent in terms of proportional information across all sectors.
Inseparable from this “message delivery package” was the highly articulate and sympathetic communicator, who consistently presented appropriate rhetoric.
Every word was carefully chosen and delivered diplomatically, and – this is characteristic of President Obama – where he possessed an assertive, empathetic tone toward opponents and audiences. Inclusivity and the drive to move forward together were evident as principles consistently demonstrated and developed in his public relations.
Obama’s hardworking communication team behind the scenes in the West Wing of the White House did not escape public attention and praise. Their reputation skyrocketed like celebrities due to their innovative practices throughout the eight years of the administration of the first African-American President in the United States.
Who doesn’t know John Favreau, the brilliant speechwriter for the President, who instantly became a role model for many political and public affairs students?
This team kept the President relevant to his citizens and the global community through what he conveyed, the tone and emphasis, his attitudes and behaviors, and the flow of information supported by mass media and social media.
The President’s positive image contributed to the success of policies, work programs, political positions, or any mission the President sought to promote.
However, we can all assume that the above is to be expected. It is indeed normative for a leader of a superpower to be supported by a solid working system prepared by seasoned public relations experts, enabling them to appear so wise, even though, as the highest policy-maker, they are inevitably in the midst of highly dynamic situations.
Counter-Diplomacy à la Trump
However, it turns out that the stability of protocol and the sanctity of communication in this country can indeed be broken and even turned upside down.
The main actor in communication, in this case, the President, is not incapable of personal breakthroughs, exhibiting spontaneous behavior, and often making contextually unjustifiable statements.
The concept that information must be tested for accuracy, communication must be logical and integrated among state actors, or that messages must be delivered clearly and unambiguously with a statesmanlike and weighty approach seems to have not applied throughout the past four years.
Adrenaline surges higher when we observe the public relations style during President Donald Trump’s era. Every detail of his public communication activities contributes to transforming the face of the United States, making it entirely different from what the world has known until now.
The White House communication team has become part of a large propaganda machine, which unfortunately often lacks sound arguments and struggles to establish an issue, whether it is for the nation’s or the President’s political interests.
Their approach is not new, but it seems never to grow old and always manages to touch hearts to cultivate naive loyalty. It is a deliberate fear communication designed to scare citizens, diminish self-confidence in the nation’s decline, instill fears of the country’s collapse, sow suspicion about everything and anyone who might disturb the status quo of the citizens (especially white citizens), create dislike or fear towards people from other countries or those deemed foreign, thereby validating xenophobia.
Internally, this campaign has psychologically wounded the nation and weakened their morale. This repercussion is exacerbated by the fact that Trump’s communication team was unprepared to shift focus and mitigate the crisis related to the real threat of the Coronavirus Pandemic.
Wearing masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the US has even become a political statement, indicating which side an individual aligns with. It is unpredictable which communication theories the Trump administration will employ to regain control of the situation that has developed thus far and achieve the aspirational goals of American society.
Externally, President Trump has constructed a purely America-centric narrative outside its territorial environment and packaged it antagonistically. For example, independence for the US means not needing cooperation with allied countries, not requiring support from international institutions, accusing injustice towards the US, disregarding other nations, and always being ready for conflict.
This maneuver further distances the US from the claim of “Make America Great Again .”Instead, it creates a perception in the world that the US is a society undergoing an identity crisis and longing for recognition.
Once again, this raises a significant question: what is the ultimate goal he aims to achieve with these agenda settings?
Messages and Communication in Trump’s Hands
Various statements and expressions by President Trump to both internal and external audiences are conveyed even more through social media (in this case, predominantly through Twitter), which does not officially represent the state entity but rather his account.
This practice violates principles of national security and credibility. Even the relationship with the press, as fellow practitioners in the field of public relations, has reached a turning point during this time.
The President’s frequent utterances of “you are fake news” become antithetical to those who understand the importance of cooperation with the media community. There are countless instances of the President walking out when he feels cornered by critical questions from the press.
The choice of words used by President Trump is also interesting to analyze. For instance, he popularized the term “socialist,” a governance ideology that many segments of American society may not have fully understood. This choice of words instantly becomes a big specter in the minds of his supporters and becomes a reason to reject the democratic style of his political opponents.
Or the promotion of the word “patriotism” to evoke nationalism and as a special attribute among white individuals (especially when President Trump’s supporters attacked the Capitol building towards the end of his administration).
This choice of words has become highly effective in stirring up primordial pride. On the flip side, he does not hesitate to make sarcastic remarks, insults, or direct derogatory remarks towards his opponents, including and especially towards women – a behavior rarely seen among national leaders.
However, out of all the unique communication artistry of President Trump, there is a phenomenon that can be considered the most dangerous and counterproductive for the future. That is the birth of the concept of alternative facts.
Communication in the political world has long-known efforts to find weaknesses in opponents to attack, engage in black campaigns, wage narrative wars, shape opinions, or create powerful imagery. Nonetheless, President Trump’s communication team introduced us to something else: an extraordinary skill in making excuses.
Instead of defending arguments with evidence and facts (which should be the principle in public relations communication), a thousand and one tricks were created to evade, cover-up, divert, or blame – one of them is the presentation of “alternative facts.”
“Alternative facts” were first defined by Kellyanne Conway, the President’s Press Secretary. This strategy can refer to everything from contradictory data, manipulated facts, skewed meanings and perceptions, and obfuscation to outright lies confidently asserted by the President’s PR team at the forefront whenever they serve the press.
Kayleigh McEnany, the White House Press Secretary, is even referred to as the most adept liar in the history of the US government. These “alternative facts” are incredibly confusing for the public and can easily lead them towards either disinformation or misinformation.
Post-Truth and Communication Platform Providers’ Responses
The communication tactics mentioned above are highly suitable in the current post-truth era, where emotions dominate the adoption of information and belief in truth, surpassing cognition.
Post-truth’s true meaning is the public’s blurring from objective facts. Now, people only hear and believe what they want to hear and believe. People are becoming more reluctant and finding it difficult to think clearly and remain neutral. This apathetic attitude is difficult amid the onslaught of information due to digital technology disruption.
This technique is an old legacy of US political communicators, as revealed by Steve Tesich in his article titled “The Government of Lies,” published in The Nation magazine in 1992.
He describes how the Watergate scandal and the Persian Gulf War kept the American public calm and comfortable, even though both incidents were lies. After these two events, the belief emerged that public opinion could be shaped through hoaxes.
Meanwhile, the narrative warfare and opinion-shaping carried out by Trump’s communication team have evolved into internalized hate speech among white supremacist supporters. This tangled web of issues raises concerns and awakens the ethical consciousness of social media users, owners, and managers.
Now, cancel culture, or the isolation of individuals in social media, has emerged as a form of social sanction if someone’s opinions or attitudes are deemed unpopular.
Social media operators and technology companies have also shown ‘de-platforming’ reactions in the form of access closures, account suspensions, or keyword filtering to counter hate speech, incitement to violence, and calls for sedition. This drastic measure was conducted by Twitter, which ultimately blocked President Trump’s Twitter account (@realDonaldTrump) on January 9, 2020.
This decision restored information neutrality, objective perspectives, and free decision-making and public stance choices. And most importantly, to heal the conscience of the people.
Important Lessons for Indonesia
This article reminds us of a simple message: that the art of communication is highly strategic and can be a double-edged sword.
Communication and public relations practitioners, the press, social media operators, and technology companies must be smarter and more vigilant if their capacities are exploited as spin doctors for ideas that go beyond the constitutional mandate, resorting to any means to achieve their goals.
Indonesia needs to remember the negative impact of narrative wars and opinions that use divisive sentiments, such as those seen in the US, as tested several times during regional head elections and presidential elections.
The maturity of our democracy and wisdom will continue to be tested by various parties amidst the openness of information and the unstoppable development of communication technology. However, if we firmly adhere to responsibility and good practices, we will remain protected from misguided thinking and attitudes.
Author: Sari Soegondo, Communication and Public Relations Practitioner, Co-Founder & Executive Director of ID COMM.