Political communication: Privileged form of discourse

By Prof Dr. Sohail Ansari

Conceived and worded by Prof DR Sohail Ansari (originality of concepts and originality of words).

He believes that there can never be a zero scope for improvement and appreciates criticism if it is not for the sake of criticism.

Political communication represents a “privileged form of discourse” about concerns in modern society__ meaning simply that we accord what it says a place of special prominence in our lives. In pre-industrial age, the forms of privileged discourse that touched the lives of ordinary persons were church sermons, political oratory of patriarch, and the words and precepts of family elders. Such influences remain in rural and tribal areas of the modern world, but their prominence within the affairs of urban life and the rhetorical force and moral authority that they carry are generally sharply diminished to nothing.

The space left as these influences have diminished has been filled largely by the ‘discourse through and about parties’. This phrase is intended to convey the idea that communications among persons, in which individual send ‘signals’ to others about their beliefs; inclinations and expectations, are strongly associated with_ and expressed through_ patterns of preferences for certain leader to certain leader manifested in upholding (by voters) of upholder (leaders) of values _ values that conform to voter’s expectation. This phrase is intended to convey that a significant portion of our political ‘talk’ and ‘action’ is about leaders and about what they can do for us.

Industrialization had great impact on the predominant set of images, values, and forms of communication of pre-industrial age and provided a new ‘cultural frame for satisfaction and model of communication’. We, therefore, need to draw upon socio-cultural perspectives in seeking to understand how cultural, social and economic changes mediated by industrialization influenced the way in which people related to political parties or leaders.

Cultural forms that gave meanings to the world of things underwent a drastic repositioning, such that in the consumer society parliament and municipal institutions came to replace the patriarch of extended families or tribal chiefs or religious institutions that were important in agricultural societies.

Economic changes resulted in lifestyle groupings that were the outcome of taste culture independent of ethnic differences. ‘one had to live with who’ was governed by what one earned. Difference in income not in ethnicity dictated the formation of middle; lower and upper class and each class represented distinctive preference patterns and that led to distinctive taste culture and lifestyles and as industrialization had great  impact upon general understanding of oneself and what one deserved to have goods had to be  integrated into the process of satisfaction and ways (components of political communication) through which they were assured (to voters) to be delivered (by parties) had to be  integrated into election campaign communication.