Negative and black campaigns

Ini adalah artikel kedua yang saya tulis setelah kepulangan saya di Indonesia. Artikel pertama adalah tentang Obama yang sudah saya upload beberapa waktu lalu.

Artikel ini sebetulnya merupakan ringkasan dari sebuah makalah pendek yang saya berikan dalam sebuah seminar. Artikel ini sendiri adalah sebuah "pesanan" dari seseorang yang sudah capek kepada iklim kampanye hitam pada waktu itu. Apakah artikel ini membantu? Saya tidak tahu.

Waktu itu saya mengirimkan versi bahasa Indonesianya kepada koran Kompas, tapi seperti biasa, tak pernah ada jawaban. Artikel ini akhirnya saya kirimkan kepada the Jakarta Post dengan pertimbangan bahwa the Jakarta Post terkenal sebagai koran intelektual dan karena sedikitnya jumlah artikel yang ditulis orang-orang Indonesia di sana, maka kans artikel ini dimuat akan cukup tinggi. Rupanya prediksi saya benar.

Ini yang menjadi awal dari hubungan saya dengan the Jakarta Post yang berakhir di tahun 2011.

----------------------

Negative and black campaigns

Yohanes Sulaiman, Jakarta | Fri, 07/03/2009 2:58 PM

 

In democratic countries, it is not uncommon for a candidate to be openly and publicly critical, negative even, of their opponent. The reason is simple: it works.

 

A critical or negative campaign mobilizes voters because it educates the masses on important issues and forces voters to think critically about the candidates. It levels the playing field, forcing voters to reconsider the chances of a candidate; a negative campaign eats the aura of a candidate's invincibility. The constant criticism creates the feeling that neither side has surrendered yet, so the election must be close.

Still, we have to be careful in defining what exactly a "negative campaign" is. It is not a "black campaign." A "negative campaign" tries to change voter perception by making them question the worthiness of a candidate, or at the very least, invokes questions on the ability of the target, by, and this is crucial, using correct and trustworthy facts.

"Black campaigning", on the other hand, uses questionable information that is very difficult to prove as objective truth. Black campaigning generally results to personal attacks, using irrelevant or irresponsible information anonymously. The rumors circulating that vice presidential candidate Boediono's wife is a Catholic is a good example of a black campaign tactic.

The difference between "negative" and "black" campaigning is evident in its effects on public opinion. A critical campaign that attacks opponents' policies actually mobilizes voters, while a black campaign reduces voter turnout.
Personal attacks in campaigning can backfire, especially when it is the incumbent who resorts to this. Campaigns that attack a political position and policies, however, can have a significant influence on voter perception.
Legitimate criticisms draw people to the voting booth, while harsh and irrelevant black campaigns simply discourage voting.

Critical campaigning based on fact boosts support for a candidate because it leads people to question the competency of their targeted opponent. People in general pay more attention to negative information than to positive information, simply because people in general try to avoid bad things.

The purpose of critical campaigning is to provide these "signs." By putting a campaign ad on air with negative information, people feel they are receiving more information about the candidate, allowing them to critically evaluate each candidate and giving them confidence to choose the right candidate. Of course, the more the attacker is able to present a credible and objective critical campaign, the more the public will believe what they say.

Although it is important to use data and statistics to increase the credibility of a campaign, what is more important is having the ability to package this information in an effective way. Data and statistics can only be useful if packaged in a way the public find attractive. This ability to present information in an attractive and affective way is known as "framing".

For example, the words "unemployment rate at 20 percent" will not easily change people's perception on an incumbent president's economic policy, unless people can be made to feel that they could be a part of that 20 percent.

Only when an employed person can be made to feel they are in danger of loosing their job, and that finding a new one could be difficult as long as the current government remains in power, will they reconsider the candidate. Hence, the candidate running this type of critical campaign not only gives information, but is also able to create a sense of fear among public that the opponent is not competent.

An effective critical campaign needs to be extremely disciplined in constraining itself, lest it enter the territory of black campaigning. Using black campaigning to pummel an opponent will simply backfire. While, to some degree, it will galvanize support, the price is paid when independent and undecided voters, who are critical for victory, are alienated. Moreover, black campaigns increase partisanship in an election, which makes it difficult to build coalitions after the dust settles.

Although critical campaigning is used as a tactic to get more votes, their most important task is to provide information to the people. Democracy can only be effective when people have enough information about the candidates and parties in the election, both positive and negative.

Critical campaigning therefore has the important purpose of educating the public so they can vote intelligently. It can also educate political elites on how to take criticism in stride and how to fight back honorably under the watchful eyes of the public.

With enough information, people will be less likely to choose unqualified leaders and will develop a critical views. In short, it makes democracy work.