The year 2016 will long be remembered for dramatic changes in political communication. Hamlet’s declaration to Polonius – “words, words, words” – could well encapsulate the essence of most politicians’ strategy. Politicians use words to elicit the emotions of the electorate and be guaranteed a job that requires no formal qualifications.

Surgeons spend a decade training to treat people with sophisticated medical tools; painters use brushes and paint to give vent to their imagination and hopefully earn a living from it; and builders use various tools to make homes that people will want to buy. But politicians have only one tool that is not so expensive to acquire, even though it is by no means always effective: words.

The most brilliant political minds will not get very far if they are incapable of articulating their ideas in words. Politicians need to stir the emotions of people to persuade them that they have the solutions to their problems. That is why politicians like to endear themselves to the media that today has taken very different forms, with social media possibly overtaking traditional newspapers and TV in its ability to influence public opinion.

Like many analysts I have long believed that in modern political communication, style has substituted substance. This year we had two major events that show how political communication is evolving into an art built on rules that up to some time ago were shunned by communications gurus. The Brexit referendum in Britain and the US presidential elections provided copious material for students of political communication, and perhaps even for business marketers, to adapt to the new paradigms of winning over the public’s support.

It is almost tragic that many politicians today are more obsessed with the way they communicate through speeches and press releases than with their long-term strategic plans for the country. They employ armies of spin doctors, speech-writers and experts in political communication to ensure that they always say the right thing to endear themselves to the electorate.

Words whip certain people into a frenzy

Then came Trump with his inflammatory and radioactive words that shocked the media and the public. The American public and many outside the US were mesmerised and shocked by the way he exposed his ideas. Many were confused when trying to interpret what he said during the campaign. They asked: is Trump using sarcasm or does he really mean what he said when he would build a 2,000 mile wall on the Mexican border? Was he kidding when he hinted that Hillary Clinton should be assassinated or that all Muslims would need to be registered if they wanted to visit or live in the US?

When a few years ago Obama steered the Obamacare legislation, the use of inflammatory language became quite common. Politicians were no longer happy to be seen to be prudent and civil in their use of words. House of Representatives minority leader Nancy Pelosi condensed the effects of the change in political rhetoric when she said: “Words have power. They weigh a ton. Words whip certain people into a frenzy depending on their, shall we say, emotional state.”

The unfortunate incident in which Jo Cox was assassinated by a British Nazi admirer on the eve of the Brexit referendum shows the extreme effects that violent political language – frequently used in the Brexit debate – can lead to. The noisy protests of many thousands of US citizens following the election of Trump are another example of the power of the inflammatory language that unorthodox politicians are using to knock down from their pedestals the more traditional politicians who increasingly fail to understand what ordinary people are feeling.

Trump may not be as irresponsible as his campaign’s aggressive rhetoric seemed to indicate. In his first announcements as President-elect he watered down his language and made some substantial U-turns. He will not be asking the FBI to re-examine the case of Clinton’s e-mailgate. He wants to help her ‘heal’ from her electoral disappointment. The Mexico border wall may in fact not be a wall at all, but rather a stretch of fences. Trump is also appointing some of the people he openly insulted during the campaign to top positions in his new administration.

Whether the new political rhetoric will indeed usher in a new era where economic fundamentals like free trade are thrown out of the window and replaced by ‘economic nationalism’ still remains to be seen.

One thing is certain: Trump’s effective rhetoric will be exploited by many political wannabes worldwide.

johncassarwhite@yahoo.com