Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher made the perceptive remark that “once a politician is given a certain image by the media, it is almost impossible for him or her to shed it. At every important stage of one’s career, this image steps in between the politician and the public, so that people seem to see not the politician but the invented personality to which the politician has been reduced”.

Lady Thatcher remarked on that occasion that her public image was, on the whole, not a disadvantageous one.

She was the “Iron Lady” thanks to Gorbachev, “Battling Maggie” thanks to the political weeklies, and “Attila the Hun” according to the popular press. These conveyed the impression that Maggie was a hard nut to crack, and one who was “not for turning”.

Media impact

With the passage of time, and mainly when the economy began to falter, Maggie overplayed her hand disposing of the “wets” around her and the media began to say that she was “isolated”, “rooted in the past” and unable to bear seeing the feudal trappings of Britain’s ancient regime crumble to dust.

The latter media slur worked both ways. Critics of her European policy accused her of “clinging to the wreckage of empire”, and others berated her monetary policies as “heartless” and “inconsiderate of the needs of the poor”.

This was not the first time that the power of the media made an impact on electoral imagination. It was not to be the last.

In fact, the media come into their own when they smell a whiff of change in the public mood, or when simmering issues of public interest come to the boil.

It takes a mature and enlightened electorate to distinguish between fact and fiction and to identify propaganda and lobby pressure, much of which amounts to manipulation of the unwary.

Yearning for new ideas

Here in Malta, the main political parties are engaged in an ongoing debate that doesn’t seem to abate. Meanwhile, the stress of daily life takes its toll.

The economy is under stress due to the weight of relentless taxation and continued government spending. Tax measures, introduced during the last three years in particular, as well as price rises, disenchanted a broad band of middle-income earners and played havoc with the lowest-paid categories of the working population. The government has moreover antagonised the General Workers Union.

As the government staggers and stumbles, as more rough times are predicted by knowledgeable sources, a groundswell of opinion within the Nationalist Party anticipates difficult times ahead. It is because of this that the yearning for new blood and new ideas gains momentum.

Perhaps it is because of this that the more active and perspicacious politicians have been constructing for themselves niches in the local media. A niche provides visibility and a platform of influence.

Politicians with enough grey matter could gain some mileage in the eventual political race, provided they offer positive contributions with a creative and constructive slant. This is prime time for sound bites.

Those who rely on vituperation, or who lack the intellect to engage in intelligent argument, are likely to do more harm than good to their personal image.

In the first place they are likely to taint their image in the eyes of the new generation of voters, which is more relaxed and discerning than electors who, up to a few years ago, associated politics with trench warfare.

Standard imprecations

Although the Maltese media could impose its imprint on certain occasions, it is the politicians who set the pace and the tenor of political debate.

To my mind, there are not enough opinion leaders in the media to push politicians and political parties against the wall.

This being so, politicians and parties making use of the media follow standard operating procedures: they tend, in the main, to cast their opponents in the cost of pejorative images referred to by Margaret Thatcher.

The ruling party paints the Opposition as “hungry for power”, forever bent on “opposition for opposition’s sake”. The Opposition, on its part, paints the ruling party as one “impermeable to change” and a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”.

Alternattiva Demokratika intones its maledictions with the slogan “A plague on both your houses” and maintains that the main parties are in collusion.

These standard imprecations have, by now, become old hat and the electorate is bored sick. It is beginning to question where the meat is.

Popular aspirations

More and more electors are beginning to concern themselves with problems that have to do with employment levels, earnings, and Malta’s survival in a world of cutthroat competition.

There is concern about delayed justice, the deteriorating health service, the plight of pensioners, the rape of the environment and such national issues as price levels, the plight of the underclass and the cost of government.

Politicians with a bent for leadership could steer their parties and their media – all the media – to loftier levels.

They may well use the media as vehicles of ideas and not only of expression. They could seek to steer the electors’ imagination, not their passions.

It is at this point that serious politicians could profit by constructive image building and by stimulating a sense of purpose to uplift the level of national politics.

Once the political waters are stirred, one must expect most politicians, and the media under their influence, to become more excitable.

With radio and television under their control, there is potential for a political tug-of-war susceptible to exploitation by politicians and broadcasters who believe that what the people want is raw meat. This is a predicament to be resisted and avoided.

Otherwise, the political arena is in danger of being taken over by a new breed of Ayatollahs to the sound of tom-toms. That may very well be a pleasure yet to come, unless there is firm and resolute leadership at the top.

[email protected]