To be honest with you I was starting to feel a bit lost on the CAPP site (and all its “children” sites). Everybody was/is talking about everything and, because the rallies are over for the moment, I found it hard to focus on anything (never mind I have homework I should be doing!).

At the moment I’m working on a pamphlet for diabetes for a volunteer position I hold, so this blog ties right in with what I’m doing. It also has given me a focus for what I may be able to do for/with CAPP.

You have helped me so much. Thank you.

ps. If you haven’t joined CAPP, I wonder if you would think about it. You’d be a big help. But I would also understand if you didn’t. Might be a conflict with your customer base. ;)

Of course, many if not most people added their own coda to that message hence the diversity of messages about Afghan detainees, pension reform, climate change etc. Give people a soapbox and…

The purpose of the rallies was quite different and quite simple. To demonstrate that CAPP could translate Facebook “clicks” to boots on the ground. In a political context this is an important capability.

What has been most surprising about the entire campaign is how thoroughly outmatched the PMO communications people have been. Their message has shifted almost daily and often compounded their problems. Few senior Ministers have been willing to carry Harper’s water on this one, the main exception has been Tony Clement who thrilled the massed Facebookies with his “chattering classes” comment.

The signal that CAPP had triumphed was delivered by none other than Tom “I’m not a Harper stooge” Flanagan (Harper’s mentor and former CoS) when he poured cold water on all the spin by saying on CBC;
“Well, I don’t know that there’s much strategy behind it. I think his problem is that the government’s talking points really don’t have much credibility. Everybody knows that Parliament was prorogued in order to shut down the Afghan inquiry, and the trouble is that the government doesn’t want to explain why that was necessary. Personally I think it was highly defensible action, but instead of having an adult defence of it, the government comes up with these childish talking points. So then you try and backfill with other stuff that doesn’t make much sense either. So it’s a self-created problem.”

Very well written piece. I agree with you wholeheartedly that there needs to be more structure and direction to the movement. Anger and discontent are one thing, but actually getting somewhere productive is something completely different. I am going to share this article for sure.

Thanks for writing it,

-Colin

Have you read this:

Stephen Harper’s communication strategy and some principles of propaganda
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/2009/11/hill-times-stephen-harpers.html

First of all, I’m not a marketing or PR professional although I have worked with a number of them.

I have spent too many hours debating on article comment forums but I have observed a few things in the process. You can usually tell when you hit a sore spot by the extent of the reaction, of course. Not to say that it furthers our cause to simply incite reaction but it’s interesting to note what the opponent holds most dear (or what they most fear). In the case of Harper I suggest that a few of the key hot buttons are “leadership”", “accountability” and trust in the Conservatives “fiscal management” abilities.

Now, we all know that there is plenty of evidence to thwart the latter two myths yet the Conservative base seems married to them nonetheless. I think it’s important to continue to reiterate the facts concerning these issues. One can say “A true conservative would never… [fill in the blank]” etc., which is true – a true conservative would never condone a $60 billion dollar budget, or blowing $130 million plus on proroguing parliament, etc.

Leadership is more of a subjective issue but do they ever get fired up when you question Harper’s leadership abilities. It’s pretty clear they have invested a great deal of energy into creating the impression he is a strong leader (mostly accomplished by saying the others aren’t). In a world where most people get their news in sound bites, you can see how many people would succumb to this constantly repeated mantra.

I strongly agree with your suggestion to use short snappy phrases. Contrary to most of my fellow posters I try and do so unless I am actually involved in a debate with someone. Who has time to read something as long as this post I am submitting here? :)

Finally, as you pointed out, a grassroots movement can’t be expected to be highly coordinated and “on message” (or maybe even have one) yet that is precisely what we are up against. The Conservatives have a very engaged base that they mobilize quickly, uses talking points, etc. It’s quite apparent to anyone that reads their media online – the conbot army as we call them. In this case we are being outwitted, outmanoeuvred and outgunned but I suppose that comes with the territory of a fractured centre-left. I think the conversation you are attempting here is important, we should always strive to communicate more effectively.