Supporters, Opponents and Muckrakers

These are some of the random insights into the opinions held all over the world on three types of people one encounters during a pre-election period

"In political campaigns the nature of supporters and opponents can be visible, though the nature of the muckrakers seem to be invisible," commented one of the political analysts known to me the other day during a discussion on the nature of the political campaigns at home and abroad. We were discussing some of the elements that go to the making of a good political campaign creatively and resourcefully.

Our friend the political analyst told us that at the outset it is necessary to know the nature of the supporters as there are the category of direct and the category of indirect supporters. The direct supporters are the type of people, who are dedicated to a cause and partial in their behaviour whether one agrees with them or not.

They are a faithful and friendly type of people who will undergo various types of stresses and strains under given pressure and they will work without much misgivings for they are certain about their returns whether they are profits or losses.

The main factor about the supporters is that they know that they will be looked after by the person, the candidate to whom they supported. In this case the supporter of a politician (a political candidate) is a special person, who knows his limits, strengths and weaknesses.

Supporters try their best to project their best self in campaigns firstly to impress the candidate to whom they support. They would spend not only money but also their energy and time on the candidate they support with an ulterior end in view.

Then one comes across the indirect supporters like the opinion leaders who belong to the categories of teachers, administrators, lawyers, artistes, clergymen and businessmen out of whom some will spend money in the way they are able to do within their limited sphere of activities.

This will tantamount to various catalyst manipulations like persuasive discussions with small groups that matter. They will not have much of a problem in the open field as they are guarded by the public as the most respected people. This is the area that a good candidate should be able to tackle resourcefully.

President Abraham Lincoln is said to have done this in the most subtle manner possible in association with the small groups. It is recorded that his presidential campaign was full of small group opinion leaders who in turn had been instrumental in persuading the public at large to vote. Lincoln had been helping the small groups by way of giving gifts like books, food and cloths and engaging himself in knowing their social problems.

He had been going round the hospitals seeing patients and asking them questions and consoling them. In this manner the genesis of the indirect supporter is somewhat unseen but stronger than the nature of the direct supporter.

"Two or three creative persuasive words matter over and above hundreds of harangues and false promises," President Lloyd George said speaking about his success as a presidential candidate and added, "wherever possible I had to crack jokes for people to remember me as a guy known to them and closer to them. I have never attacked my opponent openly instead tried my best to say that he can never ever reach my level of understanding the masses."

President Reagan used to say openly in his presidential campaigns that, "I have some secrets to be expressed about my opponent and they should be guarded only as secrets, mind you!" Then he would come out with a secret about his opponent perhaps about his failure to understand certain social activities where he had tried his best to convince but failed due to nothing but ignorance.

Then he would raise his voice and ask "Do you like to elect an ignorant candidate like my good opponent or a wise candidate like me?" The onlookers will laugh and understand that it is nothing but a joke cracked to win the favour of the voters light heartedly. The masses would say "Oh, he is a jolly good fellow".

Then we come across the third category called muckrakers, a term coined by President Theodore Roosevelt (during the late nineteenth century) to denote a kind of journalists whom he believed are harmful comparatively as their only preoccupation happen to be in support of a candidate by adverse means of publicity (pseudo made up publicity) like concocting false stories about the opponent to discredit by way of personal and private findings into family lineages, romances, marriages, occupations, corruptions, business dealings together with baseless factors bringing about disfavour in a highly personal manner.

The term muckraking is similar to our own Sinhala term mada praharaya or mud slinging. Though mudslingers or muckrakers are not directly visible, they can be brought to do an instant job of work for mass media channels (print, sound and visual). But a good hearted political candidate and his campaigners will know that the efforts of a muckraker will not last long.

Basically muckrakers are a group of supporters but dangerous as associates.

As a primary step the muckraking can go as far as gossip mongering lasts in small groups and circles, but with a better scientific and creative campaign, the effect of the muckraking will vanish in no time. Thus it is advisable to be far away from muckraking in political campaigns.

The effects may sometimes lead to social disaster in our part of the world. Some communication scholars believe (De Fleur and Dennis, Understanding Mass Communication, 1981) that in certain aspects the muckrakers have also been useful as indicators who have helped the masses to know a hidden area in campaigns and counteract them enabling them to kindle a fresh interest in a political issue.

This is only a socio-communication aspect that should be best checked when the occasion arises. Thus the concept cannot be generalized. During the pre-election periods the nature of the political campaigns matter and the mass media systems are normally challenged and advised to adhere to the ethical codes laid down for a short period to create a better climate of elections.