電視競選：如何通過形象的塑造影響輿論

As 20 of the Democrats vying for the party’s presidential nomination took to the stage for the first debates of the primary season on Wednesday and Thursday, it is critical, sayeth the pundits, that each one maximizes his or her impact and stands out from the crowd.

周三和周四，20名爭奪本黨總統(tǒng)提名的民主黨人登上首場初選辯論的舞臺(tái)，權(quán)威專家有言，每個(gè)人都應(yīng)該實(shí)現(xiàn)自己的存在感最大化，在眾人中冒出頭來，這一點(diǎn)至關(guān)重要。

But how much standing out can occur when the rules dictate 60 seconds of response time per candidate and 30 seconds of follow-up, meaning each will have, at most, six to 10 minutes, total, to make a case? It’s hard to imagine.

但按照規(guī)則，每位候選人有60秒的時(shí)間回答問題，另有30秒的后續(xù)補(bǔ)充，這意味著加起來，每人最多有6至10分鐘做陳述，究竟能在多大程度上脫穎而出?很難想象。

Until you consider that each candidate will be onstage for another 110 minutes — albeit silently. And in that silence lies a whole other communication opportunity.

直到你細(xì)想一下，發(fā)現(xiàn)每個(gè)候選人除了發(fā)言以外，還要在臺(tái)上待110分鐘——雖然是默不作聲的。而這種沉默中蘊(yùn)含著另一種完全不同的溝通契機(jī)。

“When I do media training, I always tell my clients 10 percent of how you are received is what you actually said,” said Hilary Rosen, a Democratic strategist and media consultant with SKDKnickerbocker. “Fifteen percent is how you said what you said, and 75 percent is how you appear.”

“在做媒體培訓(xùn)時(shí)，我總會(huì)告訴客戶，別人對(duì)你的看法，有10%是來自你實(shí)際說過的話，”民主黨策略師、公關(guān)公司SKDKnickerbocker媒體顧問希拉里·羅森(Hilary Rosen)說。“15%是你怎么說、說什么，75%是你的形象。”

Or rather: how you can influence opinion through image making. These are televised debates, after all, and there’s a reason we in the audience are called “viewers.”

確切地說：如何通過形象的塑造影響輿論。畢竟這是電視辯論，我們這些受眾被稱作“觀眾”也是有原因的。

“If you are a strategist for one of the top-tier or second-tier candidates, you are thinking through every element of presentation, whether it’s tie color, lapel pin or expression,” said Jen Psaki, a White House communications director in the Obama administration. “And you are doing it with the knowledge that a big part of the way voters make decisions is based on the visual representation the candidate projects.”

“如果你是一線或二線候選人的策略師，你會(huì)仔細(xì)考慮每一個(gè)表現(xiàn)元素，無論是領(lǐng)帶顏色、翻領(lǐng)別針還是表情，”奧巴馬政府白宮通訊聯(lián)絡(luò)主管珍·薩基(Jen Psaki)說。“并且這么做的同時(shí)，你同樣明白選民做決定的方式在很大程度上是基于候選人的視覺呈現(xiàn)。”

Thanks to both the Trump-driven mediagenics of this particular political moment, when going viral is as crucial as going door to door, and the crowded field, the need to make yourself memorable, and imprint your likeness on the retinas of the electorate, has become a campaign imperative. No matter what gender the candidate.

由于這個(gè)特定政治時(shí)刻的特朗普驅(qū)動(dòng)媒體遺傳學(xué)——在網(wǎng)上形成病毒式傳播和挨家挨戶去敲門一樣關(guān)鍵，也由于賽場的擁擠程度，讓人記住你，讓你的形象印刻在選民視網(wǎng)膜上，在競選中已經(jīng)是必不可少。無論候選人是男性還是女性。

“Men have just as much of a challenge as women,” Ms. Rosen said, pointing out that President Trump understands this implicitly. “He got the last laugh with his hair. And his long tie. He crafted a look, and it helped him stand out.”

“男性和女性面臨的挑戰(zhàn)一樣大，”羅森說，并指出特朗普總統(tǒng)肯定了解這一點(diǎn)。“他憑著他的發(fā)型笑到了最后。還有他的長領(lǐng)帶。他精心設(shè)計(jì)了一個(gè)造型，借此脫穎而出。”

To compete, his rivals will have to engage in the same way. “In the back of everyone’s mind will be, ‘How will that person look on a debate stage with Donald Trump?’” Ms. Rosen said.

要與之競爭，他的對(duì)手們必須采用同樣的方式。“每個(gè)人內(nèi)心深處都在想，‘那個(gè)人和唐納德·特朗普同臺(tái)辯論會(huì)是什么樣?’”羅森說。

A few of those running seem to have grasped this reality more firmly than others. Indeed, a handful of the candidates have been relentlessly consistent in defining their own image.

一些競選者似乎比其他人更穩(wěn)固地把握住了這一現(xiàn)實(shí)。事實(shí)上，少數(shù)候選人在定義自己的形象方面一直都堅(jiān)持做到前后一致。

Some of that can be attributed to what Ms. Rosen calls the “Steve Jobs rationale” — reducing both packing and the daily decision-making process of getting dressed frees up brain space for other issues — and some to the desire for keeping clothes from being a subject of conversation. (If you wear the same thing all the time, you don’t leave people much to say.)

其中一部分可歸結(jié)為羅森所說的“史蒂夫·喬布斯(Steve Jobs)理念”——減少形象包裝和日常穿戴決策程序有助于騰出心思應(yīng)對(duì)其他問題，另一部分也是希望避免穿著成為議論的話題。(如果你一直穿一樣的衣服，就不會(huì)給人留下太多話可說。)

But it also has the subconscious effect of essentially creating an emoji for the self, a visual shorthand for values and platforms in a time when — bemoan it or not — we increasingly communicate in pictogram shorthand.

但它也有潛意識(shí)效果，本質(zhì)上是創(chuàng)建自己的個(gè)人表情符號(hào)，在一個(gè)——無論你覺得是喜是悲——我們越來越多地用表情符號(hào)交流的時(shí)代，它是對(duì)價(jià)值觀和施政綱領(lǐng)的一種簡約的視覺表達(dá)。

There’s no question that on the debate stage decorum dictates that most participants will play it safe in the classic suit and tie (if relevant). But details matter, and certain precedents have been set.

毫無疑問，辯論舞臺(tái)的禮儀意味著大多數(shù)選手都會(huì)保險(xiǎn)起見，采用經(jīng)典的套裝和領(lǐng)帶(有必要的話)。但細(xì)節(jié)很重要，已經(jīng)有一些前車之鑒。