Whichever party was voted for (if people voted at all) this June 2017 election was driven by media presence more than ever before…a lot was social media.
Face-to-face debates turned into, what seemed to be, a posh besuited person’s bashing that’s if the incumbent PM turned up at all. Based by the Blair-ite media image of “I’m a person of the people and have a friendly human side” with the hand gestures like a flappy-paddle gearbox on a car, candidates did much more than “kiss-a-kid” visits we are used to, and tried to engage with people as people. Most of the electorate, or so it seemed, had made up their minds already. The main thing from the televised/sound-bite portions of the campaigns is that the electorate were voting – as with the Brexit referendum – because they were angry with the status quo and were inpatient for action.
That alone seems to be a reflection of the modern society and perhaps the party’s should have considered that _they_ are a service industry too and, as with so many service industries, have to see their role as not so much of a “powerful actuator” but a good service engineer. Perhaps considering that like the service engineers in the electorate, they represent, they need to re-examine their role and strengths and even get demoted for not reaching the expected level of support they were elected for.
Perhaps politicians ought to be in a service industry before going into public service – i.e. a 3-month work placement in a shop, pub or gas/electricity fitter or a ward-nurse/assistant.
What’s that got to do with digital skills?
It is the representation of their ideas and ideals that is so powerful. They are hoping those that elect them (and therefore support them being as powerful as they are and paid as much as they are). Without being able to meet face-to-face with the 65,490 , they have to reach them as fast as possible with quotable plans – if not promises – for what they will do for the person and/or their family. AKA a manifesto.
Social media is the fastest way at present as fewer of the target electorate read newspapers or watch the news/debate programs [perhaps through lack of trust] particularly the young. For this they need a rock-solid digital self. Not “bot” or “platitude-generator” driven. This is proven by the recent results. These digital selves are used as evidence for/against them whether they personally generate it or not and whether they like it or not. Perhaps this is why the a great number of people were swayed towards an apparently weaker party, because their leader told bitter truths.
As with other leaders (world-leaders, team leaders, company leaders, etc.) a digital self is a quick too, for assessing whether what you believe about them – no matter how you heard it – and can support or refute the pre-formed ideas of what they stand for, not just what you want to believe what they stand for.
A digital self that is long-established and true (developed with integrity and honour – not necessarily pride) stands head and shoulders above other perceptions or generated personas.