That was just one of the few phrases that lingered in my head as I pretended to be one of the top contending candidates for this year's senatorial and local elections. Yes, dear citizens, it is that time of year again, and it is that time when we must all go about our duties as citizens and elect some people into office again. Sam old same old.
But then again, maybe it's not the same. I realized checking out these candidate's commercials that something has changed. It hasn't gone on a complete 180 spin, but perhaps a 30 degree spin for the better? I'd add a smile to that because it means the race is getting tougher to win. And by that, I mean the following factors have changed substantially in terms of national poll results and advertising strategies:
1. Less candidates seem to make campaigns revolving on being seen with the poor
2. Less poor people shown in commercials
3. Less celebrity endorsers
4. More talking in advertisements
5. More speeches on what their platforms are, though they do not really elaborate on any plan
6. Still the same promise of eradicating poverty, but still no clear plan of action
7. More interaction with people of the working class-- which I think is to simulate the idea that they are going to make more policies on quality job opportunities.
8. More smiling in campaigns
9. More political endorsers-- it's an evolution from the less celebrity endorsers. I think this was meant to raise their credibility status in the public eye. I just don't know by how much
10. More serious smiles in photographs rather than "cute-pleasantry" smiles.
11. More posters and fliers illegally posted everywhere.-- Which I think they should be penalized for.
12. More campaign caravans with irritating jingles.
13. More sympathetic commercials regarding their outlook over the Filipino poor
14. More ballot numbers in posters
So, for the most part this list comprises of observations mainly on the main factors purportedly affecting voters' choice. Back in college my friend and I wrote our senior research paper on the same subject, only it was to compare the national and barangay elections in 2010. I'd be doing the same here only it would be shorter and would mainly be about the national elections only.
In its most recent survey, Pulse Asia released results on the top contenders for seats in the Senate. Not surprisingly, most of them are incumbents, and at the top of the ranks are those who were personally endorsed by the President himself in TV commercials.A short note I have about this move is a simple question. This question is directed to the President: "Why would you make such a political move?" On the plausible honest side I would like to give the benefit of the doubt that he truly believes in the capabilities and moral of these people. On the odd side that this is merely a political campaign to boost his party's name, I think it is a very cautious move. Then again, he is the President, and I doubt he would make such a move that he knew would hurt his reputation. I just think that on the blind side it is giving off the notion that he favors this set of candidates to win so that he would fully support their proposals.It comes of as a prejudiced move in short.
As to incumbents being at the top ranks, I would have to commend them on that because it means that campaign wise, they are very good-- or very creative. Still, what this only means for the veracity of campaign ads in pre-election periods is that they are still a very powerful force even with the learned. It is quite bothersome, but at the same time, commendable. Bothersome because it only shows how much better political analysts and campaign managers have gotten much better at merging recent favors of the electorate and purporting that to be the spitting image of the candidate's plan. Commendable because it means the Filipino voter is getting more complex and prudent when it comes to voting for a candidate.
This is evidenced by the attempted data input in the campaigns. An example would be illustrating or indicating their platforms. Though still general, the attempt is shown. The mere phrasing of "I will eradicate poverty and create more viable jobs" is no longer good enough to sway the average voter. I guess this is the product of years of experience under non-productivity from incumbents. I am surprised though at the slow pace of realization. But the electorate cannot be blamed. After all, it was only under the recent regime change that honest information freely circulated.
For the most part though, I guess you could say an increased quality in voter scrutiny and campaign complexity is at hand. They are not completely at the stage of "let us see what his platform is" because as you can see, most of the incumbents are still at the top ranks. How do I know then that voters have become more prudent? From the campaign materials being flashed on screen and in the radio. If you could listen to one, the prominent features from the fifteen I mentioned are the mention of plans, less celebrities, and more political endorsers. Not much progress though on the manifestation theory on physical presence because campaign posters have evolved to show the ballot number of the candidate.
Just a note to the candidates then, do not be mad, or start filing suits against COMELEC if your ballot number is suddenly changed. it was you who decided to endorse yourself using your ballot number and nobody else. However I would have to say that that is highly unethical.
Back to the campaign results then. As mentioned, the voter scrutiny has changed. Why then? More than the fact of more information circulating, it is the fact that members of the electorate are tired of mere unfulfilled promises. This is why-- to the candidates who have nothing but songs and smiles in their campaigns-- it is likely that voters would choose to vote for those whom they actually hear concrete plans from. Though they may not be well-planned out, these plans would be worth their vote.
It is now only six more days before the election. I would love to tell you who to vote, and who not to vote, but I will not. Yes, I will not do such out of my conscious effort to help you exercise your right. It is your right, not mine, nor anybody else's. So choose wisely my dear citizens...
With faithful scrutiny,
Czarina
But then again, maybe it's not the same. I realized checking out these candidate's commercials that something has changed. It hasn't gone on a complete 180 spin, but perhaps a 30 degree spin for the better? I'd add a smile to that because it means the race is getting tougher to win. And by that, I mean the following factors have changed substantially in terms of national poll results and advertising strategies:
1. Less candidates seem to make campaigns revolving on being seen with the poor
2. Less poor people shown in commercials
3. Less celebrity endorsers
4. More talking in advertisements
5. More speeches on what their platforms are, though they do not really elaborate on any plan
6. Still the same promise of eradicating poverty, but still no clear plan of action
7. More interaction with people of the working class-- which I think is to simulate the idea that they are going to make more policies on quality job opportunities.
8. More smiling in campaigns
9. More political endorsers-- it's an evolution from the less celebrity endorsers. I think this was meant to raise their credibility status in the public eye. I just don't know by how much
10. More serious smiles in photographs rather than "cute-pleasantry" smiles.
11. More posters and fliers illegally posted everywhere.-- Which I think they should be penalized for.
12. More campaign caravans with irritating jingles.
13. More sympathetic commercials regarding their outlook over the Filipino poor
14. More ballot numbers in posters
So, for the most part this list comprises of observations mainly on the main factors purportedly affecting voters' choice. Back in college my friend and I wrote our senior research paper on the same subject, only it was to compare the national and barangay elections in 2010. I'd be doing the same here only it would be shorter and would mainly be about the national elections only.
In its most recent survey, Pulse Asia released results on the top contenders for seats in the Senate. Not surprisingly, most of them are incumbents, and at the top of the ranks are those who were personally endorsed by the President himself in TV commercials.A short note I have about this move is a simple question. This question is directed to the President: "Why would you make such a political move?" On the plausible honest side I would like to give the benefit of the doubt that he truly believes in the capabilities and moral of these people. On the odd side that this is merely a political campaign to boost his party's name, I think it is a very cautious move. Then again, he is the President, and I doubt he would make such a move that he knew would hurt his reputation. I just think that on the blind side it is giving off the notion that he favors this set of candidates to win so that he would fully support their proposals.It comes of as a prejudiced move in short.
As to incumbents being at the top ranks, I would have to commend them on that because it means that campaign wise, they are very good-- or very creative. Still, what this only means for the veracity of campaign ads in pre-election periods is that they are still a very powerful force even with the learned. It is quite bothersome, but at the same time, commendable. Bothersome because it only shows how much better political analysts and campaign managers have gotten much better at merging recent favors of the electorate and purporting that to be the spitting image of the candidate's plan. Commendable because it means the Filipino voter is getting more complex and prudent when it comes to voting for a candidate.
This is evidenced by the attempted data input in the campaigns. An example would be illustrating or indicating their platforms. Though still general, the attempt is shown. The mere phrasing of "I will eradicate poverty and create more viable jobs" is no longer good enough to sway the average voter. I guess this is the product of years of experience under non-productivity from incumbents. I am surprised though at the slow pace of realization. But the electorate cannot be blamed. After all, it was only under the recent regime change that honest information freely circulated.
For the most part though, I guess you could say an increased quality in voter scrutiny and campaign complexity is at hand. They are not completely at the stage of "let us see what his platform is" because as you can see, most of the incumbents are still at the top ranks. How do I know then that voters have become more prudent? From the campaign materials being flashed on screen and in the radio. If you could listen to one, the prominent features from the fifteen I mentioned are the mention of plans, less celebrities, and more political endorsers. Not much progress though on the manifestation theory on physical presence because campaign posters have evolved to show the ballot number of the candidate.
Just a note to the candidates then, do not be mad, or start filing suits against COMELEC if your ballot number is suddenly changed. it was you who decided to endorse yourself using your ballot number and nobody else. However I would have to say that that is highly unethical.
Back to the campaign results then. As mentioned, the voter scrutiny has changed. Why then? More than the fact of more information circulating, it is the fact that members of the electorate are tired of mere unfulfilled promises. This is why-- to the candidates who have nothing but songs and smiles in their campaigns-- it is likely that voters would choose to vote for those whom they actually hear concrete plans from. Though they may not be well-planned out, these plans would be worth their vote.
It is now only six more days before the election. I would love to tell you who to vote, and who not to vote, but I will not. Yes, I will not do such out of my conscious effort to help you exercise your right. It is your right, not mine, nor anybody else's. So choose wisely my dear citizens...
With faithful scrutiny,
Czarina
No comments:
Post a Comment