Friday, November 20, 2009

Is the Media Biased Against Un-Charismatic Politicians?

When a candidate complains that his charismatic opponent is receiving far more favorable coverage than himself, the media becomes more circumspect. Almost self-conscious. But, there is very little bias if the public is responding to a candidate with great enthusiasm. Professor Drew Westen, psychologist and neuroscientist at Emory University says,"The charge of bias against a charismatic contender can have a chilling effect on coverage, leading to an embargo on visual images that depict the reality of public response or an obligatory snarky comment or caveat following every story that describes something the candidate has done well. I saw the process in action during the primaries when Hillary's charge led to media concerns about airing footage that would seem too positive for Obama. On more than one occasion, a television producer would ask me for suggestions about film clips to illustrate the point I would be making on air a few hours later or a point they wanted to make, and would reject an appropriate clips because it was ‘too positive’ or because it was from a victory speech. But a victory speech is hardly unfair to show simply because it shows the candidate victorious. That's what victory is"(2008 para 3).


References

Westen, D. (2008 July 27). How should journalists cover a charismatic candidate? When the subjective is objective. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/drew-westen/how-should-journalists-co_b_115256.html.

Related: Charisma

Friday, November 13, 2009

The Changing Winds of Charisma

History is replete with the vagaries of politicians who are feted and lambasted with the winds of change. "…The British public did not see Winston Churchill as a charismatic leader in 1939, but a year later, his vision, confidence and communications skills made him charismatic in the eyes of the British people, given the anxieties they felt after the fall of France to the Nazis and the Dunkirk evacuation. Yet by 1945, when the public turned from winning the war to building the welfare state, Churchill was voted out of office. His charisma did not predict his defeat. The change in voters' needs was a better predictor (Nye 2008, para 6)." These sentiments are echoed within James Madison's Federalists Papers, # 57. Under this guise, human nature cut both ways. On one hand the people would elect representatives to be stewards for their interests. On the other hand, the ego and self-interest of the politician would keep him aligned with his constituency to gain re-election.

Charisma is effective in connecting a politician to the emotional security of voters, but ultimately, politicians must effectively meet the needs of constituents. This back and forth does make logical sense for public policy in conjunction with the nuance of human nature. It is the astute politician who uses charisma to skew favor to his side. Understandably, there will be times when a principled politician won't be able to satisfy the needs of his collective constituency. Being adroit and adept at saying "no," but allowing it to go down easily is the hallmark of effective politicking. This is the advantage charismatic politicians have over adversaries. The ability to use charisma as a tool to strategically ensconce difficult policies within the soft belly of visceral and practical realities. If played well within the media, such maneuvers suggest that the politician is "getting things done." Even when policies act unfavorably to some constituents, this won't necessarily be a deal- breaker, because constituents know when a line has been drawn between their individual greed and the overarching interests of a collective agenda.


References



Nye, J. (2008 May 6). The mystery of political charisma. Wall Street Journal.

Related: Charisma

Friday, November 6, 2009

Charisma: Its Effect on Politics & Media

The 1960 Kennedy-Nixon Debates ushered in an era of politics that has transformed how politics plays in the media as well as how public policy is formulated. The emergence of candidate-centered politics made individual personalities as important, if not more, than policy platforms. Eminent sociologist Max Weber transformed the concept of charisma from its religious origins to its secular manifestations. Weber asserted that charismatic personalities gained power and significance through sheer will, determination and ambition contrary to inheriting or climbing the corporate hierarchy (Weber 1978). His notion of Charismatic Authority was prescient in that this leadership model would find a place within modern politics. The Celebrity Industrial Complex (Orth 2004)turned celebrities into politicians and politicians into celebrities, which allowed California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to go from film star to governor without any political experience or political platform. The objectivity of the media became skewed, because journalists either fawned over charismatic politicians or were self-conscious about seeming overly positive when a charismatic politician connected with the public viscerally. The effectiveness of proposed public policy considerations were no longer vetted or mulled over, but presented to the public as "focus group" to determine its acceptance. How the proposed initiative resonated in the media would determine how hard politicians fought for legislative passage. Media objectivity has also been called into question when it has to juggle its role as public "truth provider" versus for-profit corporation. Arguably, the media has often opted for the latter with the notion, "If it bleeds, it leads." The bloodletting could be literal or metaphorical.

References

Orth, M. (2004). The importance of being Famous: Behind the scenes of the celebrity-industrial complex. New York. Henry Holt & Co., LLC.

Weber, M. (1978). Weber: Selections in translations. Runciman, W. (Ed.). United Kingdom. Cambridge. Press.

Related: Charisma

Friday, October 30, 2009

Deciphering the Messages of Charismatic People

A common sense approach to dissecting charismatic rhetoric from rationality might be:

1. Using deductive and inductive reasoning to pierce the veil of rhetoric. Deductive reasoning arrives at a specific conclusion based on generalizations. While, Inductive reasoning takes events and makes generalizations (Trochim 2006). Whether the generalizations come at the end of a case (Inductive) or in the beginning (Deductive), it is important to follow the logical connection between the generalizations as well as the factuality of the generalizations.

2. Thinking within a principle-centric reality. Philosopher Ayn Rand (Peikoff 1982) encouraged critical thinking through principles or overarching ideas of an argument. For example, if a person believes humans are created in the image of God, the person is operating from a principle that he believes a higher power created individuals and would necessarily reject the idea of Darwin's "Evolution." Principles often reflect paradigms. If one can understand someone's mode of thinking, he may see reality through another's lenses, but still maintain his own reasoning.

3. Separating emotions from reasoning. Former President Bill Clinton was known for his ability to compartmentalize his emotions. He could be embroiled in a personal scandal on one hand and focused on foreign policy on another. To him, one thing had nothing to do with the other. Being inspired about the message and metaphors of a political message may garner hope, but emotionally driven hope should never become a substitute for rational public policy.


References


Peikoff, L. (1982). The Ominous Parallels. New York. Penguin Group.

Trochim, W. (2006). Deductive and Inductive Reasoning. Research Methods Knowledge base. Retrieved from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/dedind.php

Related: Charisma

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Charisma & The Real Power of Women

The proverbial "Battle of the Sexes" was really never a battle. From a physical standpoint men may leverage power over women; but from the standpoint of real power of influence, women have always had more power than they might have imagined. In a Biblical sense, it was man's love of a woman that lead to his making choices adverse to his own existence. Women have influenced men in ways that either contributed to his greatness or downfall. The power lies in the occupancy of the heart. She who controls the heart of a man influences his actions. Generally, people often make decisions on emotions and then justify their actions through reason. Even the most powerful man in the world answers to his spouse. It is a shared relationship that involves mutual love, but if the woman is evolved, she has a great deal of influence over her man. Whether it is through platonic or romantic love, women have power to control every aspect of society.

The disparity comes when a woman does not know her individual and collective power. In relationships, the way to a man's heart is to gain his respect. A woman gains a man's respect by being a "friend to his mind." The cerebral nature of man is such that everything has to make sense before opening himself up to vulnerability. When a woman begins to cater to the man's wants and desires embracing his aspirations, he inevitably allows her into his inner sanctum. The inner sanctum is where the heart lies. When a woman gains a man's respect, he will give her the key to his inner sanctum. Once this inner sanctum has been entered, if she leaves, a piece of him goes with her. Respect brings about honor and if he dishonors her, he shatters his vision of his ideal, which causes him great pain and loss.

Many women do not exhort this type of power because they do not gain the man's respect. To gain this type of respect, a woman must be the paragon of a man's ideal of her. Her true power is finding her higher self, so that she can decipher misguided men who wish to prey on her versus the man whose inner sanctum she wishes to indulge. The work for the woman begins far in advance of her meeting her ideal man. When she has completed her self-analysis and reformation, she can attract her ideal man. It is her illusions that keep her from realizing her ideal self. The illusion that her beauty defines her value hinders her from fully developing. As a result, she grows old, disillusioned, and jaded without the privilege of re-gaining her years nor appreciating the lessons to be learned.

Man's love for women is a woman's greatest tool. If the world has not given women their just due, it is because women have not wielded their power effectively. The fact that women earn seventy cents to a man's dollar demonstrates the fact that women who are married to policy makers are not demanding parity from their spouse. The power that women command could influence public policy based on what transpires at the personal level. It is no mistake that prior to hiring executives, billionaire Ross Perot often visited the prospective employee's wife at their home to gauge whether she supported the rigors that came along with the job. He believed that the relationship the man had with his wife from 9:00PM to 6:00AM determined his effectiveness on the job from 9:00AM to 6:00PM. Perot felt that if the spouse was not supportive of the man's position, he would be an ineffective employee. That's the power of women! Sometimes women, who do not have to work based on their husband's position, are less altruistic to the needs of women who are not as privileged. In seeking selfish security, these housewives are not concerned with the disparity that exists among working women. Thus, a few women rest on their laurels and the rest are relegated to second class citizenry. Women let their illusions get in the way of their power.

Women can never be better than the idea they have of themselves and the world around them. The perception that this is a "man's world" is because women have not seized the power that is rightfully theirs. If the first recorded woman in history could influence her man to disregard the edicts of Divinity by eating an apple, what could a contemporary woman influence her man to do? There are a few ways women can manifest the real power they have if they are willing to shirk their illusions which is two-fold:

1. Women should commit to an idea of Self Mastery where they assume total responsibility and commitment to personal growth in all aspects of their life. This should be done through the idea of life-long learning, deeper insights into a spiritual connection with a higher power, and a sensible diet with a physical fitness regimen. Through Self Mastery, women may overcome self-hatred, violence, and non-productivity. These intangibles supersede the need for artificial stimulants, materialism, or codependency. Women who judge themselves to be successful feel empowered, value their existence, and are dedicated to preserving it. This can never be the responsibility of the people outside of her.


2. Women should commit to the idea of holding people responsible for thir actions. People Management is the idea that we monitor the people in our lives and determine if they meet the standards of treating us and others with proper dignity and respect. Part of the problem has been allowing loved ones to take advantage of us as well as others. We cannot dictate the behavior of others, but we can surely isolate them to the point where reform is better than exile. Women have to be brutally honest about what they want. Women are and will always be the greatest catalyst for influencing men and the direction of the world.


The power a woman manifests is correlative to the level of her development. She will forever rein as a dominant force on the stage of life whether she exercises her power or merely allows it to remain dormant. In this century, the women who utilize their power to the fullest extent will see the world better reflect the vision of their aspirations. The mirror of life is a reflection of our higher self in harmony with our greatest actions. As Magaret Thatcher once said,"In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want things done, ask a woman."

For more information, visit: Charisma

Friday, September 18, 2009

Charisma & The Illusion of Power

Power, as an illusion, represents the idea that power is not created or conjured up, but transformed from one reality to the next. Reality is represented by one's mindset. Internally, nothing has changed, but externally, all has changed. Take for instance the idea of a rare and precious painting selling for millions of dollars years after the death of the painter. In life, the painter was a struggling artist who had rejected materialism and worldly possessions. The most he ever sold in his entire life was one painting for very little compensation. Over one hundred years after his death, on May 15, 1990, Vincent Van Gogh's (1853-1890) "The Portrait of Doctor Gachet" sold for an astounding $82.5 million! What changed from his last brush strokes over a hundred years? The answer is nothing! The painting is the same, but our reality of its worth has been transformed. The power behind the painting lies in the illusion that we ascribe to it. The painting did not change merely the power that we gave it.

Power is often the creation and maintenance of illusions. William Shakespeare (1564-1616) once said that he did not create new words, he merely took old words and made them new. His power and words have lived for nearly four hundred years. Power is a sought after force that is often misunderstood. More often than not, individuals treat the concept of power separate from themselves. They look to gain power by external means such as the accumulation of money, fawning over people believed to be powerful, or pretending to be something they’re not. Actually, the last perspective is the closest to gaining power, because it does begin with the individual perceiving himself as powerful, but in a more visceral sense. Power is not some obscure entity that must be wrestled from its captor so that the individual might enjoy its rewards. On the contrary, power is always present and seeks to accompany all that will have it. It often acts like the prudish schoolgirl who wishes to be romanced before she gives into her suitor. Often times, the best way to get her is to act disinterested and she will cater to your deepest desires. Power wants to be possessed, because it has no utilitarian value by itself. It is pure energy existing without any purpose other than the one we give it. Power in its purest form is the amalgamation of the intellect, creative expression, and physical action. Thus the essence of human kind is to usurp power for its own good. The birthright of humankind is to exercise power to dominate the earth for its betterment. All this rests with the individual realizing that power devoid of expression is an illusion.

The attainment of power begins by acknowledging that the expressions can be manipulated to bring forth power. It is safe to say that one must be the symbol of power before he can reap the benefits that power brings. The three ways that the individual may manifest power are:

· Think in terms of power
· Become the embodiment of power
· Talk directly to people who represent power

Related: Charisma

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Charisma: Reflecting Our Role Models

Regardless of who we are, we want role models who not only represent who we may become, but who look like we do. It is often not enough to have role models who merely share the same ethnicity, but who remind us of ourselves. Role models must come in every form to reflect the cosmetic look of all of society. Recently, the modeling world has come under fire for relentlessly pushing models whose physical appearances do not accurately reflect the general population. The general population is not extremely thin, blond haired with perfect teeth. We have flaws that do not come close to the images identified as the ideal. As a matter of fact, recent reports suggest that the flawless features exhibited by the models on magazine covers are not real. These "flawed" models have been air brushed or "digitally" manipulated to remove the bags under their eyes or the freckles on their face.

Images that help the self-esteem of individuals are the ones that society cries out for. Recently, a friend who has been in the woman's retail industry for numerous years revealed that the fashion industry popularizes and makes specific sizes for women in keeping the myths going. Consequently, if you are sizes 12-14 the industry popularizes sizes 6-8. This is tantamount to the "guess your weight game" at amusement parks. No matter what you do, the correct weight is illusive, because it is the ideal that is being sold, not the style!

It is natural for our ideals to be reflected in others. As social beings, we gather much of our motivation from the examples of others. One day we may believe something is impossible to accomplish, the next day someone has done the impossible. It gives us more hope when that person looks like us. This ideal crosses ethnicity. Brunettes want to marvel at the feats of other brunettes. Blonds want the same for other blonds. Dark skinned Blacks want to see other dark skinned Blacks accomplishing great things. We are specific in our affinities. The days of generalities are gone. Society has grown to the point where our desires are detailed. However, it is not necessary that we follow the same people we admire. There is no need to become a model because people say you look like a supermodel. If you are 6'6" and resemble Michael Jordan that doesn’t mean your aspirations should be to play basketball. Role models inspire us to strive for more, but we need not aspire for the exact same things they do.