A Positive Campaign Pays Off: Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard

On 24 November 2007, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard were elected as Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of Australia.

This was hardly expected. The on-line Progress Magazine described the surprise:

…”it has been argued that Howard simply outstayed his welcome, had grown tired and voters were attracted by a dynamic and fresh alternative. However, on its own this explanation ignores the considerable forces that stood in the conservatives’ favour. Australia is experiencing unprecedented prosperity on the back of a commodities boom and the growth of India and China. In spite of some high profile policy failures, the government was perceived as competent. Therefore, analysis needs to turn to what Rudd did to engineer this stunning victory. “

One of the frequently commented on elements of their campaign was that they ran it in a very “positive” way. Why might this and their communication strategies have created a momentum for them that led to such an unexpected result?

1) Promoting a positive vision. Rudd and Julia Gillard focused on their mission to bring a positive vision of what they wanted to achieve for Australians. Instead of painting the incumbents as inept and evil, which we see all too often in North American politics these days, they actually agreed with key elements of the incumbent’s platform where it made sense to do so and then elaborated on what they saw as gains that could be made in critical areas.

This had a double benefit. One was the direct benefit of appearing as sincere and balanced voices for a inspiring future. The other was indirect — in that every time the Government criticised them it showed itself as only capable of negative responses, highlighting the distinction between a positive, balanced viewpoint and a derogatory, dismissive, and negative viewpoint. Australian voters showed themselves ready to embrace the positive and I suspect that voters all over North America are as well.

2) Communicating where it counts. In addition to running a positive tone in their campaign, they found the voters where they really hang out. Instead of focusing on the major media outlets, they shared their message on morning talk shows, had blogs and MySpace (Julia Gillard; Kevin Rudd) pages — they connected with people where they already are instead of making the people come to them. And they clearly Connected more than by using the traditional routes.

I am a bit disappointed about some of what they have produced. Or not. Julia’s last post on her blog was on 20 October — yet it could have been a real vehicle for keeping readers (read: voters) up to date on what she was thinking and doing and choosing and why. Kevin Rudd’s one and only post on his MySpace blog was on 24 July. And I can find no evidence that they intend to keep this kind of direct on-line connection alive now that that the campaign is over and I think that’s a shame.

One of Julia’s posts on her MySpace blog was about the importance of politicians being “real people” – people who haven’t lived perfect, unblemished lives or lives that need to be hidden from their electorate and I salute her for that. And a blog — a real blog – would let her continue to be seen as a real person dealing with real, complicated issues and asking for feedback from those that read it.

Too often politicians want to Connect with the voters during the campaign, then seem to forget all about them until the next time. What are strategies that might contribute to staying grounded and connected — in both directions — after the campaign?

In the meantime, congratulations to Australia and Australians for choosing the positive instead of running from the worst negative. I hope we here in Canada have that choice for our next election!