Comedy serves various functions in politics. In addition to offering relief during tough times, it can emphasize a
politician’s authenticity and impact the public’s perception of them.
Politicians and public figures often express stress, frustration, or strong emotions in a hostile, or annoyed manner when speaking publicly. This behaviour can result from the high-pressure environment, constant scrutiny, and adversarial situations they face. They use this tone to convey passion or frustration about specific issues, believing it can engage their audience and garner support. Some intentionally adopt an aggressive or confrontational style to stand out, grab media attention, or appear resolute. However, it’s important to note that while this communication style can be effective in some cases, it can also be divisive and lead to negative outcomes. It may alienate people and hinder productive political dialogue and compromise. A politician’s public image can vary widely based on their communication style, and it may not always be the most effective way to achieve their goals.
It’s essential that our representatives maintain integrity and work for the benefit of the constituents rather than succumbing to mob rule. This trend started in the late 1970s and intensified during Premadasa’s five years in office and when the Rajapaksas came into power, it reached Herculean proportions
Effective political communication often requires striking a balance between expressing strong emotions and maintaining a civil, respectful tone to engage with a diverse range of constituents and stakeholders.
For some, the famous Deutsche Welle in Berlin, RW ‘fearlessly addressed vital issues,’ and ‘Ranil seems to have seen sense at last,’ while others believe that ‘the president’s aggressive stand during the interview is largely for domestic consumption, a political exercise aimed at building his image as a leader who would not compromise the country’s sovereignty,’ and a ‘Talk in a loud, aggressive, or indignant way with little effect.’
Was he totally out of character and disgraced himself?
UKIP politician Godfrey Bloom was approached by Channel 4 journalist Michael Crick who asked why the party’s brochure, entitled ‘changing the face of politics’, was covered with pictures of people’s faces, without a single non-white one. Bloom responded: “What a racist comment is that. How dare you, that’s an appalling thing to say - you’re picking out people for the colour of their skin. You disgust me.” He then proceeded to whack the journalist over the head with the brochure before storming off.
After being the first US President to ever resign from office, Richard Nixon, the disgraced ex-President returned to open up to the American people in a series of interviews in 1977, with British reporter David Frost. The interviews featured Frost grilling Nixon on his life, presidency, and of course, his scandals. While Frost was commended for his work, Nixon didn’t come off as well. He defended his questionable actions. Nixon may have denied the allegations against him until his death, but these interviews are as much a part of his infamy as the Watergate scandal.
There’s a lot of research about how journalists ask tough questions while staying neutral. But it turns out that the people being interviewed have their own tricks too when dealing with tough questions. However, nobody has really looked at the fact that those being interviewed also sometimes ask questions. When they do this, it can create a kind of unfriendly atmosphere, which isn’t great for the public image of politicians. By turning their answers into questions, politicians can challenge what the interviewer is saying and also make them responsible for responding to that challenge.
Mary Elizabeth Truss, a 48-year-old British politician, assumed the position of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on September 6, 2022. However, she made a surprising announcement of her resignation just six weeks later, on October 25, 2022. During an interview at the News Xchange event with RTÉ journalist David McCullagh, Truss was reminded of the Daily Star’s unusual stunt, where they live-streamed the wilting of a lettuce in a blond wig as a metaphor for her political longevity, as suggested in an Economist article. When asked if she found humour in the Daily Star’s stunt, Truss responded, as reported by the Press Gazette, “I don’t think it’s funny; I just think it’s puerile.
A striking example of this occurred on March 30, 1981, when President Ronald Reagan was shot. As he was rushed to the hospital, his lung pierced by a bullet, Ronald, the film star managed to maintain his sense of humour. Looking up at his doctors, he famously quipped, “I hope you’re all Republicans.” Despite the seriousness of the situation, Reagan’s ability to inject humour won him favourable attention and resonated with the public.
Researchers have looked closely at how people talk to each other in interviews, the kinds of questions they ask, how they answer those questions, and the tricks they use to get what they want. They hope that this way of studying interviews will make more people interested in and better at studying political interviews on TV, especially in the diverse countries of Asia. Getting detailed information from places in Asia that aren’t in the Western world will also help us understand how political communication works across different cultures.
During election time, we have the opportunity to observe how politicians handle media inquiries and perform in interviews. While some political interviews can be boring or frustrating, others can be painful, amusing, shocking, or just plain embarrassing to watch. These moments often get shared with others for laughter or to highlight the challenges of political discourse. Once individuals are elected or appointed to public office, they are expected to act as “Statesmen” rather than “politicians.”
Encouraging open, respectful, and empathetic discussions between journalists and politicians can play a role in healing political divisions and fostering a more harmonious society.
Indeed, most journalists aim to conduct productive and informative interviews. However, if the interviewee, are unprepared and cannot address basic questions, it can hinder the journalist’s ability to do their job effectively. Furthermore, it is crucial to promote ethical and principled behaviour in politics and to support leaders genuinely committed to improving their communities and nations. Encouraging open, respectful, and empathetic discussions between journalists and politicians can play a role in healing political divisions and fostering a more harmonious society. These principles underscore the significance of professionalism, preparedness, and ethical conduct in both journalism and politics.
It’s essential that our representatives maintain integrity and work for the benefit of the constituents rather than succumbing to mob rule. This trend started in the late 1970s and intensified during Premadasa’s five years in office and when the Rajapaksas came into power, it reached Herculean proportions.
Politics, like many other areas, is a complex and multifaceted field where individuals have their own strengths and weaknesses. Public perceptions of political leaders can also be diverse and are often influenced by a range of factors, including personal beliefs and political affiliations. Unfortunately, many politicians tend to prioritize their own interests or cater to a select few rather than serving the common good. The absence of modesty, humour, and diplomacy in politics is concerning. Embracing these virtues can lead to a more constructive and effective form of governance if we prioritize their importance and reintegrate them into the political discourse.
kksperera1@gmail.com
