the power of a frame

Here's Ronald Reagan on the stump in 1980, telling a heckler where to get off:

Incidents like this, in the harsh glare of a presidential campaign, can damage a candidate. But this display of irritation didn't harm Reagan. Insofar as voters noticed, their reaction was similar to that of the people present at the rally.

Now imagine that John McCain makes a similar remark, on camera, during the course of the next few months (as we know he is more than capable of doing). The media will play and replay the tape, and ask grave questions about whether a man of John McCain's temperament is suited to the office of president.

I don't think this is because the media have got tougher on candidates in general, or that they're particularly hard on McCain. Neither do I believe that Reagan delivered his remark with some kind of saving charm that McCain couldn't muster.

I think it's more likely that Reagan's show of temper was ignored by voters  and commentators because it didn't fit their idea of who he was. Reagan, as everybody knew, was a sunny optimist.

Once a candidate's 'frame' (or narrative, or brand) is established in the public eye, it's very hard to shift. Events that accord to that pre-existing perception of the candidate are magnified. Events that don't fit it are screened out and ignored, unless they're absolutely unignorable.

This is partly a media thing, and partly a voter thing. Both parties have an interest in keeping things simple. Most people don't have time for nuance.

It's why John McCain has pretty much got away with mixing up Sunni and Shia groups in Iraq, on more than one recent occasion. Everybody knows that he's an expert on Iraq (imagine if Obama had made the same error). It's why Obama has got away with some fairly dodgy attacks on McCain. Everybody knows he's a pretty straight kind of a guy (as we say here in Britain).

A presidential candidate is engaged in a race to define him or herself before their opponents do it for them. Clinton's strength and her weakness has been that she's already been framed, as an experienced, competent but cynical politician. Obama has been seeking to frame himself as the candidate of change, and as an honest, decent man. But there's a way to go yet. The country as a whole is only beginning to size the new guy up.

That's why the Republicans are so excited about 'Bittergate'. They sense a frame coming on... 

Comments

[peter]

Reagan's outburst was also at the very end of the campaign (so there was little time for the media to disseminate it or discuss it before the election) and it took place in 1980, before the Web and Youtube. It's not clear that even he would get away with it today, especially if the outburst happened earlier in the campaign.

On the other hand, there have been politicians who became renowned for their ability to make quick, witty put-downs of hecklers. In Britain, Winston Churchill, and in Australia, Billy Hughes, both attracted hecklers eager to best them (and audiences eager to watch the contest).