The Good, The Bad, The Spin

I knew I was sunk when I went from a mental fence-sitter to a relatively quiet advocate of a certain presidential candidate. I didn’t set up a protest outside of my house, though.

Despite my asserted virtue (however ill thought at times) of not taking sides in many matters, there are of course many things that deserve a definitive view of being, for lack of better terms, “right” and “wrong.”

I’m not convinced the presidential election necessarily fits this mold, despite the fervent efforts of so many who have spent considerable effort advocating for one side or another.

After the 2004 election, a sunken advocate of the losing side entered my office clearly dejected. My response to him: “This is why I don’t get attached to outcomes.”

Which is what I consider to be the lesson now, just as it was then. The point isn’t who wins, it is how we manage our responses to who wins and who loses. Of course I have my favorites. But when the odds of something so portentous as a presidential election, with noted worldwide consequences, is at stake, there isn’t much an individual can do at the end of the day.

The election therefore becomes an opportunity for how to handle both success and failure. Bemoaning AND celebrating outcomes can become an exercise in self-indulgence, which can be harmful regardless of which sides win.

Psychologist Bert Hellinger puts it better than I ever could. This is his poem, called “The Players.”

The declare themselves
Opponents.
Face to face
They play
On one common board
With many figures,
And complex rules,
Move for move,
The ancient Game of Kings

Each sacrifices
Many pieces
In their game,
And seeks advantage
Until there are no moves to make
And then their match is done

Then, changing sides
And colors,
They begin another round
Of that same Game of Kings 

But whoever plays enough
And often wins
And often loses
Becomes a master

–Of both sides 

The Public Relations Society of American threw down a challenge yesterday to both presidential candidates. In a statement,

PRSA Chair & CEO Jeffrey Julin, on behalf of the PRSA Board of Directors, asks the campaigns to sign a formal pledge obligating them to abide by the PRSA Code of Ethics in all communications, stating that:

“The use of innuendo, incomplete information, surrogate messaging and character attacks, whether in political discourse or other forms of commercial free speech, raises serious concerns for our organization and its 32,000 members, each of whom signs a pledge to the PRSA Code of Ethics. In fact, ethical practice is the most important obligation of PRSA membership, and we maintain that our obligations extend not only to those we represent, but also to the publics they serve. We view the code as a model for other professions, organizations and professionals, including political campaigns.”

PRSA has yet to receive signed pledge forms back from the campaigns, but is responding to media interview requests as we continue to speak out publicly and vigorously on the issue.

It won’t happen, but PRSA does with this public statement more to advocate for the public relations profession than anything else recently. Well done.

“The ideologies of the left and right took shape before Darwin, before Mendel, before anyone knew what a gene or a neuron or a hormone was. Every student of political science is taught that political ideologies are based on theories of human nature. Why must they be based on theories that are three hundred years out of date?”

– Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

I get a kick out of what is known as politics. At its base, the idea of, to put it simply, who gets what and how much, ultimately is moral in nature. Yet morality arises from a strongly influenced genetic basis, an often unacknowledged need for group identity and preservation against attack.

Put in this context, the naming of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as McCain’s running mate was an exceedingly well-executed strategy (attack, for the cynical among you) against democrats. On top of it, the timing was impeccable. What validates the success of this strategy is the voluminous commentary since.

On the political left, it’s been particularly amusing. One local blogger, a feminist no less, refers to Palin as mere “passive” “arm candy” whose appointment is but a positive career move.

The subtle viciousness of these scenes should be given more prominence as sociobiologic states of self-preservation, as in the hard-wired prevalence of, in this case, cognitive dissonance. (more…)