Author: Festim Rizanaj
(The author is a PhD candidate in Journalism at Anadolu University)
The emergence of political posters dates back to the revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. During the French Revolution (1789–1799), posters emerged as an instrument used in political struggle. They were used to make announcements and inform about events. Small-format posters pasted on walls helped to create public attention for revolutionary goals and to mobilize people. World War I is associated with the emergence of famous posters aimed at recruiting volunteers for the army and promoting war bonds. In Russia, posters experienced a tremendous development with the revolution of 1917 and the civil war. With the advent of radio in the 1920s, political communicators were provided with a new means of addressing the public. However, posters remained an important instrument in the attempt to influence the public. Posters once again played a central role in propaganda activities before and during World War II. In Germany, Nazi propaganda relied heavily on posters. In the 1950s, television began its triumphant advance in the industrialized world. Advertisers enthusiastically embraced the audiovisual medium, but television remained closed to political and ideological purposes in many countries and was open only to election-related advertising. Thus, the political poster survived mainly in its specific form as the electoral poster. The emergence of political parties and party competition stimulated the rise of electoral posters. The creation of universal exclusivity and the necessity to address and win over the electorate gave a visible impetus to electoral posters. Therefore, more than any other campaign instrument, posters can create attention for the upcoming election. Parties and candidates who do not use posters risk not being noticed by voters at all. They are simply not present.
Discourse is a constitutive element of politics as a social practice. In electoral campaigns, more specifically, language and other semiotic resources are used in the process of interpreting a candidate’s identity and securing voter support. Public speeches, rallies, and propaganda materials such as videos and photographs are important for establishing a relationship with voters and building one’s legitimacy by asserting one’s qualities – even though they can also do so by disavowing and delegitimizing their closest competitors. Electoral propaganda aims to influence the collective imagination, by framing candidates in particular ways, presenting them as capable of providing solutions to the problems that they strategically place at the center of attention. Elections are therefore a process of mass persuasion where the tools of public discourse are put to work towards an ultimate goal.
Electoral photoshoot
Political photography plays an important role in constructing a candidate's identity. Perhaps for this reason, Roland Barthes emphasizes that they have "a persuasive power that must be analyzed." Political photography contains a certain attractiveness as it tries to create an interpersonal relationship with the viewer. According to Barthes, a candidate's photograph goes beyond the program that he has to offer, what the candidate displays are not his policies, but rather a perceived perspective of themselves, "the image of a candidate establishes a personal connection between him and the voters; the candidate does not only offer a program for judgment, he suggests a physical climate, a set of daily choices expressed in a morphology, clothing, pose." With this he emphasizes that the image of the candidate is more important than the candidates' policies and the campaign is based around portraying them as the ideal moral embodiment that the voter seeks.
However, Barthes warns us that the types or styles involved in electoral photography are not rich in variety. They would be limited to interpreting their social status or respectability, from a right-wing candidate in a suit and tie, for example, to more left-wing candidates who, trying to echo the desires of a younger generation, might appear in more casual attire. The second type to be interpreted in electoral photography is the intellectual, whom Barthes describes as a combination of “thought and will, reflection and action,” and finally the “beautiful person,” whose physical attributes and appearance are offered as credentials or perhaps even proof of their ability to perform the functions they aspire to. Thus, according to Barthes, these photographs convey mainly three types of meanings about a candidate, that is, a participant represented in electoral photos, namely the respected candidate, the intellectual, and the handsome.
“Photogénie électorale” (Albanian: Fotogénie Elektorale) is an essay by French literary critic and theorist Roland Barthes, which aims to examine the tendency of contemporary social value systems to create modern myths. The essay was published in 1957, and Barthes explains how photography manipulates the system of signs that Saussure describes. He begins the essay with a statement of his observation that political candidates who want to be elected attach a portrait or campaign photo along with their prospectus. He then goes on to say that these portraits or photos should be analyzed and dissected because the candidates clearly believe in their power to influence the minds of voters. Although Roland Barthes’ essay was written in the 50s, when tall posters were being printed in electoral campaigns, it essentially offers a semiological way of reading electoral photographs. The days of campaign posters are long gone, but in the age of the internet, the photos they choose to post on social media are just as important. Through these images, they portray an idealized version of themselves in the hopes that people will vote for them. In order for this to work, the images they use must tell a story, and they will probably remain just that.
The photograph or portrait or image image creates a sense of personal intimacy between the candidate and the voters. This, according to Roland Barthes, results in the elections returning to their previous paternalistic nature: “the photograph thus aims to strengthen the paternalistic foundation of the elections, their ‘presentational’ nature, undermined by the proportional system and the reign of parties (it seems that the right uses it more than the left). Therefore, the electoral photograph is an admission that the electoral process is not driven solely by rational thought, but by irrationality. Voters are not aware of what the candidates’ real motives and actions are through these electoral photographs, but the voter sees what the candidates want. What the candidates offer us is a portrait of a lifestyle that we would be inclined to accept.
So these photographs are not a window into the candidates' ideologies, but a mirror in which the candidate can imagine himself. In associating with the candidate, voters are expected to vote for themselves through the candidate. Roland Barthes describes this as the delegation of voters and, according to him, it is an example of photogenetics: "the voter is seen expressed and heroized at the same time, he is invited to self-select, to charge the mandate that he will give for someone else with a real physical transfer: he delegates precisely his 'race'.
Candidates representing parties such as national parties must blend the image of action and will, reflection and action at the same time. A candidate portrayed with piercing glasses appears to voters as someone who analyzes a problem or obstacle and seeks solutions around it. A three-quarter portrait (three-quarter) of the candidate's face looking up at the supernatural light elevates the candidate to the pedestal of Mount Olympus, where social contradictions do not exist and if they do exist, the candidate, when elected, will solve all issues. The photograph here is used as a form of blackmail to lure voters into associating themselves with images of their reflection in the candidate or using subliminal messages through these portraits to grab votes. The candidate uses his experiences with various prior services so that the voter feels sorry for the candidate and it is almost as if the voter is rewarding the candidate for his duties regardless of his policies.
His next key points concern pose and composition. Barthes suggests that a particular direction in which a candidate is facing echoes the perceived intent. A full-face or frontal photograph expresses insight and sincerity; “the future leader is looking at the enemy, the obstacle, the problem.” He also introduces the prop factor, with the example of glasses that make the candidate more ‘cautious.’ He then goes on to examine the three-quarter-length photograph, commenting that it is usually the preferred pose. Almost, the three-quarter photographs are impressive, which "suggests the tyranny of an ideal", as Barthes says, "the gaze dissolves nobly towards the future, confronts nothing, but possesses and makes fertile an indeterminate 'find' with delicacy... the face rises towards a supernatural light that calls it, raises it to the heights of a high humanity" which leads the voter to believe that the candidate has the answers and solutions to the problems in hand.
Another key issue that Barthes addresses is that the average person does not read the candidates’ platforms and is not fully in touch with what they represent. So, to appeal to the voter who is unaware of such facts, they play on the idea that the candidate is on the same socio-moral level as the voter (look at me: ‘I am like you’). Barthes highlights this as what is fundamentally wrong with this system of sensibilities portrayed through the media and their electoral team. Photography, Barthes writes, reveals “something deep and irrational lying outside politics”. He further adds that photography constitutes “an anti-intellectual weapon and tends to remove ‘politics’ (meaning a set of problems and solutions) in favor of a ‘way of being’, a socio-moral status”. To put it in the language of politics, presidential elections are about “character” (a “way of being”), or at least that is how it is presented in the media. Although during elections citizens often say that they would like to know more about a candidate’s stance on the issues that surround him, the emphasis in campaign coverage tends to be on the issue of character (“judgment,” “harshness”) over political debates—that is, the crazy debates. Photographs serve the function of reinforcing this socio-moral status, and we often see campaigns struggling to define the meaning of a given image. Barthes adds that “what is transmitted through the photograph of the candidate is not his plans, but his deep motives, his family, mental, even erotic circumstances, his lifestyle being at once his product, his example, and his bait.”
Barthes now brings some new factors into the equation. Since the role of family is perhaps the most important factor in politics, candidates are not ruthless in involving family in the campaign, which the average family may find sensitive. He also makes a good point when he talks about erotic situations, the message that comes from this is that the vote can simply be given to whoever is believed to be the most attractive or has the most attractive family, which leads to the next key point. “A photograph is a mirror, it shows the familiar, the familiar, it presents the voter with his own portrait clarified, exalted, raised to type”. Barthes plays with the idea that the candidate presents a similarity in the type of social environment, a close relationship with family, religion, etc.: “what most of our candidates show in their portrait is a social condition, the spectacular comfort of family, legal, religious norms,..”
The public exposed to political photographs connects with them in some way, so society votes for posters that promise change, but they don’t really know what change is. The photograph also becomes a fetish object in that it has a power that we “magically” assign to it. This is why Barthes is so important; because we all need to be aware of the ideology that surrounds us every day, and the best way to be aware of it is to understand how it works through Barthes’ analysis, realizing that all these things that we take for granted are really just modern mythology.
It is interesting that Barthes does not discuss photographs that emphasize the profile. Perhaps they do not exist in political photography? Can a profile suggest that something is being hidden? What is remarkable about Barthes is the way he explores these concepts and takes them further. Barthes, more than being a semiologist making the move towards postmodernism, is an astute analyst of society. In Barthes we have the beginning of the transition from hermeneutics (what something means) to semiology (how something means).
Communication of image and not of policies
Electoral propaganda aims to influence the collective imagination, framing candidates in particular ways, presenting them as capable of providing solutions to the problems that strategically place them at the center of attention. Elections are therefore a process of mass persuasion where the tools of public discourse are put to work towards the ultimate goal: securing a seat as representative in specific legislative positions as established in the political configuration of a modern republic.
The local elections in Kosovo have just concluded. More than ever, social media sites played a key role in the presentation of candidates in their campaigns. The photos they choose to upload have replaced the physical poster format that adorns their faces. Although physical posters were not lacking, those on social media made a difference. Photos of candidates for mayor were posted extensively on their accounts, on the pages of the party and support groups created for the campaign.
The Vetëvendosje Movement (LVV) chose to position the images of the mayoral candidates on the right. This is done on purpose, as we generally see things from left to right. The Vetëvendosje Movement prefers to compose the photographs of its candidates for municipalities in a three-quarter face pose, except for the Gjilan candidate who was also in a full-face or frontal pose. As discussed above, Barthes would believe that this is so that the reader sees a leader who looks to a bright future of prosperity among other things. He also possesses the solution to the problems that his voter faces. The images of the candidates themselves contain a slight smile that makes the viewer feel at ease, makes them want to smile. The image of the candidate for mayor of Gjilan from the ranks of the Vetëvendosje Movement with a full face expresses insight and sincerity in relation to obstacles and problems, and his appearance with glasses, according to Barthes, creates the image of a more cautious person.
The images of the candidates of the Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK) are mainly positioned on the left of the poster, two of them on the right and two in a full-face (frontal) pose. Even the candidates from the ranks of the Democratic Party of Kosovo express a slight smile in their images, simply to create a more relaxed communication with their voters. The image of the candidate for mayor of Prizren and that of Malisheva is with a full face and a smile but with hands crossed. Hands crossed in body communication symbolize uncertainty and a move to protect the person. At the same time, such a gesture is read as a break in communication with the other party, or complete indifference.
The image of the candidates of the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) is positioned on the right side to facilitate their reading. The image of all candidates is in a three-quarter pose except for the image of the candidate for mayor of Prishtina, Gjilan and Peja, who is in a full-face, frontal pose.
The candidates of the Alliance for the Future of Kosovo have also decided that their images will occupy space on the right side of the electoral posters. At the same time, the image of the candidates was three-quarters, which means creating an illusion of solving every problem they face. Unlike the others, the candidate for mayor of Gjakova from the ranks of AAK uses the frontal pose on his electoral poster but has his hands tied with fingers intertwined. People often make this gesture when they cannot convince the other person. Also, when they are worried about what they say or hear.
Among other social-moral elements that have occupied space in the photos of the candidates for mayor has been the family. Some of the candidates have published various photos with their family and children, implying his social stance, as a good family man and devoted to the family. Small children act as a symbol of innocence and this plays with the emotions of the voter. When we see an image of the candidate with his children adorned with smiles, this gives the voter an indication of his role in the family and his role as a father. It should be added here that certain candidates are considered with the social-moral concept of 'father', being evaluated as such throughout the area of operation.
The woman has also been an element that has been used during the campaign in the published photographs. The role of the woman has become so crucial that she had to accompany the candidate alongside him in various rallies and meetings that he held. She is seen as the person who supports her husband and if the first lady is not of a standard to lead and support her husband, how is the candidate able to lead the city.
Another social-moral element that occupies space in the electoral campaign and in the photographs published during it are the visits made to religious institutions and the meetings held with them. These photographs are taken to create a good image and closeness to religion and the religious part of society, even though in the programs of those candidates we do not have any policy in the sphere of religion and religious life.
Often candidates use the sensitivity of war in their personal electoral image, in the form of published photographs of visits and homages paid to monuments symbolizing the last war. Barthes called these candidates 'decorated' for uniformed services, where the candidate uses his experiences with the service in order to make the voter feel sorry for the candidate and it is almost as if the voter is rewarding the candidate for his duties without considering his policies. Where such photographs, according to Barthes, "constitute a genuine blackmail of moral values: homeland, army, family, honor, battle".
Barthes's theory of photography and electoral appeal is relevant now more than ever. In an era where photography is one of the main forms of communication, we must learn to read them. As campaigns have become smarter and have been enriched with more money and resources for them, they have understood what a key role photography plays in the way we see candidates. Campaign leaders have tapped into what the voter wants to see through signs and socio-moral values. Manifestos have been replaced by a single word, which is intended to represent all the beliefs of the candidates. Family in particular has been used as a symbol and all the connotations that we associate with family.