Campaign Strategies and Traditional Politicking
(Originally written before the 2001 elections)
During campaign season, it is already expected that the streets will be flooded with pointless posters from people who ordinarily may not even give you the time of day.
Ok, that’s not a fair description of those people. But what is fair to say is that most of the time their posters are meaningless. Politicians spend thousands to millions of pesos for posters that don’t even educate why they should be voted. What’s in their posters are their names (relevant), their smiling faces (smiles you may not see once you actually need something from them, unless they’re up for reelection), and slogans that are just meaningless promises, without even solid steps on how to achieve them.
How come I rarely see posters that actually discuss solid facts, like past achievements. Not empty character traits they can’t prove, like maginoo, maka-tao (pro-humanity) or maka-pamilya (pro-family). How do I know if a candidate is really maka-Diyos (Godly); just because he said so in his poster? Even worse slogans are “Puso ng Senado” (heart of the Senate), “Tinitibok ng Masa” (heartbeat of the people), “Idol ng Kabataan” (idol of the youth) and similar unfounded generalities. What do they mean anyway? And says who? What about “Alam ko ang Pangarap ng Pilipino” (I know the dream of the Filipino). So what? Don’t we all? What are you going to do about it?! These slogans fill up a poster and they don’t even give me a reason to vote for the candidate. If anything, it gives me a reason not to vote for the candidate. Why should I vote for someone who thinks the people are so dumb that they would actually vote for candidates simply because of unsubstantiated, empty and meaningless catch phrases.
Apart from the slogan and the name, practically the only thing noticeable is the face. No place for a list of accomplishments, because the face occupies most of the poster. When you think about it, what do we care about what the person’s face looks like? Are we supposed to vote based on good looks? Are we supposed to trust them with governing us simply because their face looks trustworthy and friendly, all with their attractive smiles? Are we supposed to judge books by their covers? I really don’t care what the candidate’s face looks like, if I know what his accomplishments are, and from there see what he is capable of doing. From “face-only” posters like these, I can guess how wise the candidate is, how smart he thinks his voters are, and how well he can manage (spending his money on unenlightening posters). Has anybody else noticed the Laguna gubernatorial candidate and MBA’s Laguna Lakers team owner Bert Lina’s really large posters, inviting people to watch the Lakers? How come his picture is larger than the Lakers’ logo and name?
Of course, most of us are aware of the despicable campaign tactics of many candidates, such as Manny Villar’s awful effort at self-promotion even before the political ad ban was lifted. Going on TV just to tell us we need sipag and tiaga (industriousness and patience seem to be the closest words) for a successful life. Gee, tell us something we don’t know! And his campaign jingle is still using the same theme! Don’t tell me that wasn’t planned. What about the “Sagipin ang Puno” (save the trees) posters? When the campaign season was official, the posters with the same style and fonts suddenly bared the face of Dong Puno. I wonder what he needs saving from, a losing senatorial bid?
And what about those jingles?! The L-O-I and Puwersa ng Masa jingles are just terrible! And what about the many local campaign jingles, most of whom modifications of existing songs such as Sex Bomb and the Voltes V theme, and I’ve even heard one from Eminem’s Stan… Do they even pay royalty for these songs? In what way do jingles make one candidate better than another? Wasteful use of campaign money! Had they just donated the money to charity, they may have gotten my vote. As it is, their contribution to noise pollution just lost my vote. Jingles are unnecessary and for me is a sign of a traditional politician.
Do you remember the joke where if you want to be President, you should be an actor first? Well, if nobody’s added to that, I will. If you want to be senator, marry a popular actress. (Isn’t Nora Aunor available?) Not to judge Pangilinan or Recto on that alone, but then again, I don’t see Joker Arroyo’s wife in his campaign ads. Nor Juan Flavier’s wife (then again, I don’t know if they are married).
And is Noli de Castro really independent as he claims he is? I don’t see him objecting to the use of his name under the Puwersa ng Masa banner. Of course, that would be smart because that’s “free” advertising, but that would show he has a poor capability to stand on his beliefs, not unless he really is “Pro-Erap”.
And what about all those “Paid for by the friends of…” postscripts on political ads. Of course, we are familiar that nominees are set a limit by Comelec on how much they can spend on their campaign, which is why payment for most ads are paid for by the friends of the nominee, and not the nominee himself, thus should not be counted from his set budget. At least that’s what we’re led to believe. Of course, it’s very possible that in some cases that that’s just a flat out lie, but even if it was true, that should worry us a bit. Remember how many of Estrada’s friends paid for his campaign? And what did they take in return? That can be scary. Some people do give without expecting anything in return except good governance, but not all. Definitely not all.
I was appalled when I saw campaign posters of one of my classmates in high school, running for councilor. Based on what I knew from him during that time, he was just bad! Our Principal would agree. And based on his campaign methods, it looks like much hasn’t changed. How is it that a person with enough money can create “nice-looking” posters, and maybe even win an election, even if his character is bad (to put it lightly). Is it about money these days? Enough money to fool the people? Are the people that gullible? I hope not. It’s sad to know that sometimes (maybe most times) more well meaning people lose elections to worse candidates simply because the worse candidate has more money to put on a better image that is actually meaningless and useless.
It's great that several ads from the media and other well meaning groups are urging the people to vote better, with presentations that I hope are as thought provoking as I think they are. I hope people wise up when they vote, and look beyond the façade, beyond what is shallow and meaningless, and look for substance. Something you KNOW you can trust. Not just faces and slogans and ads. Because if we, the people, don’t wise up, we will get what we deserve.
During campaign season, it is already expected that the streets will be flooded with pointless posters from people who ordinarily may not even give you the time of day.
Ok, that’s not a fair description of those people. But what is fair to say is that most of the time their posters are meaningless. Politicians spend thousands to millions of pesos for posters that don’t even educate why they should be voted. What’s in their posters are their names (relevant), their smiling faces (smiles you may not see once you actually need something from them, unless they’re up for reelection), and slogans that are just meaningless promises, without even solid steps on how to achieve them.
How come I rarely see posters that actually discuss solid facts, like past achievements. Not empty character traits they can’t prove, like maginoo, maka-tao (pro-humanity) or maka-pamilya (pro-family). How do I know if a candidate is really maka-Diyos (Godly); just because he said so in his poster? Even worse slogans are “Puso ng Senado” (heart of the Senate), “Tinitibok ng Masa” (heartbeat of the people), “Idol ng Kabataan” (idol of the youth) and similar unfounded generalities. What do they mean anyway? And says who? What about “Alam ko ang Pangarap ng Pilipino” (I know the dream of the Filipino). So what? Don’t we all? What are you going to do about it?! These slogans fill up a poster and they don’t even give me a reason to vote for the candidate. If anything, it gives me a reason not to vote for the candidate. Why should I vote for someone who thinks the people are so dumb that they would actually vote for candidates simply because of unsubstantiated, empty and meaningless catch phrases.
Apart from the slogan and the name, practically the only thing noticeable is the face. No place for a list of accomplishments, because the face occupies most of the poster. When you think about it, what do we care about what the person’s face looks like? Are we supposed to vote based on good looks? Are we supposed to trust them with governing us simply because their face looks trustworthy and friendly, all with their attractive smiles? Are we supposed to judge books by their covers? I really don’t care what the candidate’s face looks like, if I know what his accomplishments are, and from there see what he is capable of doing. From “face-only” posters like these, I can guess how wise the candidate is, how smart he thinks his voters are, and how well he can manage (spending his money on unenlightening posters). Has anybody else noticed the Laguna gubernatorial candidate and MBA’s Laguna Lakers team owner Bert Lina’s really large posters, inviting people to watch the Lakers? How come his picture is larger than the Lakers’ logo and name?
Of course, most of us are aware of the despicable campaign tactics of many candidates, such as Manny Villar’s awful effort at self-promotion even before the political ad ban was lifted. Going on TV just to tell us we need sipag and tiaga (industriousness and patience seem to be the closest words) for a successful life. Gee, tell us something we don’t know! And his campaign jingle is still using the same theme! Don’t tell me that wasn’t planned. What about the “Sagipin ang Puno” (save the trees) posters? When the campaign season was official, the posters with the same style and fonts suddenly bared the face of Dong Puno. I wonder what he needs saving from, a losing senatorial bid?
And what about those jingles?! The L-O-I and Puwersa ng Masa jingles are just terrible! And what about the many local campaign jingles, most of whom modifications of existing songs such as Sex Bomb and the Voltes V theme, and I’ve even heard one from Eminem’s Stan… Do they even pay royalty for these songs? In what way do jingles make one candidate better than another? Wasteful use of campaign money! Had they just donated the money to charity, they may have gotten my vote. As it is, their contribution to noise pollution just lost my vote. Jingles are unnecessary and for me is a sign of a traditional politician.
Do you remember the joke where if you want to be President, you should be an actor first? Well, if nobody’s added to that, I will. If you want to be senator, marry a popular actress. (Isn’t Nora Aunor available?) Not to judge Pangilinan or Recto on that alone, but then again, I don’t see Joker Arroyo’s wife in his campaign ads. Nor Juan Flavier’s wife (then again, I don’t know if they are married).
And is Noli de Castro really independent as he claims he is? I don’t see him objecting to the use of his name under the Puwersa ng Masa banner. Of course, that would be smart because that’s “free” advertising, but that would show he has a poor capability to stand on his beliefs, not unless he really is “Pro-Erap”.
And what about all those “Paid for by the friends of…” postscripts on political ads. Of course, we are familiar that nominees are set a limit by Comelec on how much they can spend on their campaign, which is why payment for most ads are paid for by the friends of the nominee, and not the nominee himself, thus should not be counted from his set budget. At least that’s what we’re led to believe. Of course, it’s very possible that in some cases that that’s just a flat out lie, but even if it was true, that should worry us a bit. Remember how many of Estrada’s friends paid for his campaign? And what did they take in return? That can be scary. Some people do give without expecting anything in return except good governance, but not all. Definitely not all.
I was appalled when I saw campaign posters of one of my classmates in high school, running for councilor. Based on what I knew from him during that time, he was just bad! Our Principal would agree. And based on his campaign methods, it looks like much hasn’t changed. How is it that a person with enough money can create “nice-looking” posters, and maybe even win an election, even if his character is bad (to put it lightly). Is it about money these days? Enough money to fool the people? Are the people that gullible? I hope not. It’s sad to know that sometimes (maybe most times) more well meaning people lose elections to worse candidates simply because the worse candidate has more money to put on a better image that is actually meaningless and useless.
It's great that several ads from the media and other well meaning groups are urging the people to vote better, with presentations that I hope are as thought provoking as I think they are. I hope people wise up when they vote, and look beyond the façade, beyond what is shallow and meaningless, and look for substance. Something you KNOW you can trust. Not just faces and slogans and ads. Because if we, the people, don’t wise up, we will get what we deserve.
