Boris the great communicator
13/02/08 11:17 Coffee machine moments
Now this is interesting - no, really, stay with me.
London Mayoral Candidate Boris Johnson has been
awarded the Chartered Institute of Public Relations'
Presidents medal for communicator.
Cat, meet pigeons, pigeons, meet hornets nests and other mixed metaphors. On his 'A PR Guy's Musings' blog Stuart Bruce is outraged. He points out that Boris has described black people in pejorative terms and committed other lapses in taste and common sense, and his howlers are a long-term trend rather than a one-off.
I have to confess Boris has always fascinated me. He acts like a buffoon but everyone knows he isn't; he's also a damned good writer, perhaps oddly. His book on Rome should be read by everyone with a vague interest in ancient history, you'll end up caring passionately about it and I have no doubt the series on which it was based, which I missed, would have been just as enjoyable.
The problem is that he's reached this age - he's about the same age as me - when being a court jester just isn't as worthwhile an occupation as it used to be if he has any ambitions whatsoever. So he's gone for something that requires some sort of depth and will involve actual responsibility.
And this, dear reader, is where it's all likely to start going wrong. The thing about 'characters' in the media who're also in politics is that they can often make excellent points and be really good voices of conscience, from either side of the spectrum. In the 1960s Tony Benn was superb at telling the Labour Government where it was going wrong. He then joined the Cabinet and ended up in a lot of trouble for not towing the party line. In the 1960s and 1970s there was no-one better than Michael Foot at critiquing the Government of whichever political stripe - then he became Labour leader, had to compromise and fell rapidly from favour.
Boris until recently was great. He appeared on talk shows, called for classical education for all (unrealistic perhaps but is it really so far from the new proposals to get kids into culture?) and can make the odd excellent point, without necessarily being party political.
To this extent he's a superb communicator and his ability to publicise himself and make himself likeable to people who don't share his politics is unsurpassed. If he'd had this award two years ago I'd have probably agreed with it. The thing is, he's getting it now, when he's putting himself up for something serious and fighting against a heavyweight and the communication suggesting 'I'm a heavyweight too and I can stop Ken Livingston' simply hasn't happened.
So, should he have got the award? I'm going to suggest not, at least not at this stage. From the comments on Bruce's blog I suspect I'm not the only one who thinks like this.
Cat, meet pigeons, pigeons, meet hornets nests and other mixed metaphors. On his 'A PR Guy's Musings' blog Stuart Bruce is outraged. He points out that Boris has described black people in pejorative terms and committed other lapses in taste and common sense, and his howlers are a long-term trend rather than a one-off.
I have to confess Boris has always fascinated me. He acts like a buffoon but everyone knows he isn't; he's also a damned good writer, perhaps oddly. His book on Rome should be read by everyone with a vague interest in ancient history, you'll end up caring passionately about it and I have no doubt the series on which it was based, which I missed, would have been just as enjoyable.
The problem is that he's reached this age - he's about the same age as me - when being a court jester just isn't as worthwhile an occupation as it used to be if he has any ambitions whatsoever. So he's gone for something that requires some sort of depth and will involve actual responsibility.
And this, dear reader, is where it's all likely to start going wrong. The thing about 'characters' in the media who're also in politics is that they can often make excellent points and be really good voices of conscience, from either side of the spectrum. In the 1960s Tony Benn was superb at telling the Labour Government where it was going wrong. He then joined the Cabinet and ended up in a lot of trouble for not towing the party line. In the 1960s and 1970s there was no-one better than Michael Foot at critiquing the Government of whichever political stripe - then he became Labour leader, had to compromise and fell rapidly from favour.
Boris until recently was great. He appeared on talk shows, called for classical education for all (unrealistic perhaps but is it really so far from the new proposals to get kids into culture?) and can make the odd excellent point, without necessarily being party political.
To this extent he's a superb communicator and his ability to publicise himself and make himself likeable to people who don't share his politics is unsurpassed. If he'd had this award two years ago I'd have probably agreed with it. The thing is, he's getting it now, when he's putting himself up for something serious and fighting against a heavyweight and the communication suggesting 'I'm a heavyweight too and I can stop Ken Livingston' simply hasn't happened.
So, should he have got the award? I'm going to suggest not, at least not at this stage. From the comments on Bruce's blog I suspect I'm not the only one who thinks like this.
|