20 June 2016
Whatever the results of this week’s British referendum to stay or pull out of the Economic Union the term “Brexit” will go into the annals of history.
It’s a clever abbreviation that rolls off the tongue so much better than its rival “Bremain”.
Such is the magic of a good campaign name or slogan. While no individual seems to claim authorship, the term "Brexit" seems to have derived from a refinement of the term "Grexit" relating to Greece's troubles with the EU.
Willem Buiter and Ebrahim Rahbari, two economists from the Citigroup, wrote in an article in February 2012: “We are raising our estimate of the probability of a Greek departure from the euro zone (‘Grexit’) to 50 percent....”
The British referendum has many more lessons for us, particularly in the art of political communication. The Brits are so sophisticated when it comes to this communication form that they make the American political machinations look crass by comparison – and crass they are at present, given the daily dramas of the primaries.
In researching this blog I came across another post that had some fascinating insights http://proofcommunication.com/brexit-campaign-a-study-in-the-art-of-political-communication/4414
Two terms leapt out at me – “astroturfing” and “discourse technologists”.
Apparently “astroturfing” refers to covertly mobilising support for a cause to give the impression of a spontaneous wellspring of public sentiment. Downing Street was accused of trying to drum up support for the “Bremain” camp by asking many of the great and the good to sign letters of support. It back-fired when two thirds of recipients refused to sign. A former military leader is quoted as haughtily saying: “This subject is far too important for us to be dictated to by an over ambitious junior spin doctor.”
“Discourse technologist” is an in-vogue label to describe public relations practitioners who engage in efforts to shape (or is it reshape?) the widely understood meaning of words. The example given was of David Cameron’s people not opposing the suggestion that the EU takes away Parliament’s “sovereignty” over laws, borders and taxes but suggesting the term “sovereignty” is more about a state’s influence rather than its ability to govern itself. This redefinition was a subtle way of shifting the debate more favourably into the “Bremain” territory.
For all the public relations manoeuvring that has taken place it may well be the “real world” tragic death of Jo Cox, MP at the hands of a deranged individual, that has galvanised the public to think seriously about the subject of the referendum. With the polls narrowing, the result could be a cliff-hanger.
It’s a salutary reminder that we live in a violent world and that the gift of democracy and the right to have our say through elections and referenda should be nurtured and cherished.
Campaign side-shows are fascinating and entertaining but at the end of the day, thankfully, it’s still the actions of individuals at the ballot box that counts.