The prime minister’s recent interview with ANI which marked the launch of the poll season was unusual enough to make most people watch at least parts of it. The trouble was that it was 90 minutes long, which meant that for a whole generation accustomed to communicating in 280 characters, it was simply unwatchable. That’s a pity. For the interviewee did have something to say. The gargantuan interview covered all issues, including the Ram Mandir, corruption, farmers’ woes and even the Rafale deal. At one point, Modi very reasonably asks why middlemen are involved at all. At another point, he is almost emotional on the tension involving the “surgical strike”, while he appeals for better understanding of the costs of demonetisation. Then is the expected presentation of data to measure success. Modi is vibrant in speech. In cold hard text, the interview is simply not strong enough because too many issues were crammed together.

But then that’s the problem with the BJP’s strategic communication. It’s caught between the cleft of modern technology and actual message delivery. This is surprising to say the least. “Brand Modi” won a landslide victory with his team using all social platforms, sometimes responding in real time, to deliver a message of change and vibrancy. As marketing experts noted, Narendra Modi brought the BJP out of obscurity and irrelevance in much the same way that the IMac and IPod brought Apple centre stage. Modi the brand won the landslide victory. The party itself was only a vehicle.
Narendra Modi during the interview on Wednesday. ANI

Narendra Modi during the interview on Wednesday. ANI

Ironically, five years later, it’s the party’s image that has become larger and is tarnishing the Modi brand. The BJP and its ideologues have managed to get more public space than the man who won the war. In short, the core messaging that is being put across emanates from the party — thus the “Ram Mandir” rallies, the cow slaughter issue, vigilantism and the increasingly anti-minority debate that is spilling virulently onto Twitter. It is not that the BJP or its affiliates, the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh or the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, were doing anything different from the past. They just had a far larger platform than before, which meant that they were prime media material. The prime minister was not. As The Washington Post noted, on most issues that came up on national television – as different from issues of national importance – he was silent. While it is entirely true that a prime minister cannot be expected to comment on every subject, the fact remains that his media managers erred in not reinforcing the earlier image of a “strong man” who could crack the whip when required. In common with much of the world, Indians love a tough no-nonsense strongman who may veer dangerously close to being a dictator.  When he is seen as caving in to the mob, the glitter fades irretrievably.

But Modi does speak, and often. His Twitter account seems to have thousands upon thousands of followers, even ruling out the bots and fakes. Whoever manages his account, keeps it updated, even if not madly interesting. The weekly Mann ki Baat launched on 3 October, 2014 had undoubtedly generated a lot of interest in a country where prime ministers are rarely seen or heard. It also generated some Rs 5 crore for All India Radio annually. Covering 92 percent of India’s territory, and nearly 100 percent of the population, it is the ideal vehicle for a direct outreach to all corners of India, and to the lowest strata. The merchants, traders, vegetable vendors and tobacco sellers are all certain to have a small radio blaring somewhere. It isn’t clear how many actually listen, but a survey by the AIR did show that listeners were (unsurprisingly) maximum in Gujarat, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh. The lowest were in the south, particularly in Andhra Pradesh. That’s unsurprising too. That level of pure Hindi is probably unintelligible on the other side of the Vindhyas. One way of reducing the mismatch is to simplify the Hindi and the subjects introduced. AIR should try to make it less of a lecture and more of a fireside conversation. Also, given that it may have lost its novelty somewhat, also shift it to a major event class, rather than a weekly monologue.

Then, there are websites like 'My Gov’ which is meant to showcase the government’s achievements and also take in suggestions from the public. Any attempt to register on this site and submit a suggestion is exhausting. The larger “transforming India” website is impressive in terms of statistics that, however, have no link that will give them a measure of believability. A link to the source of these statistics would be useful for anyone wanting details on, for instance, the complete electrification of India that Modi referred to in his interview. That is quite an achievement. The point is that the data should be freely available. The Niti Aayog website is better, with its links to various data sites and a bank of good information and presentations. What would be really useful is readily available infographics with embedded data on health, specific assistance to farmers and even perhaps data on the benefits of demonetisation that was supposed to bring money into the white economy. The prime minister in his interview had the figures on his fingertips. The rest of the nation doesn’t. It therefore relies on vague stories and fake news.

Underlying all of this is the fact that Modi is an outstanding speaker, especially when compared to his predecessor. The fact that the old magic still works was recently apparent in his address at Port Blair, which showcased his ability to sway a crowd that probably understood only half of what he said. But his powerful presence was clearly not enough to sway the recent elections, where the BJP lost heavily. Moreover there is the issue of over exposure. The reliance on one man to deliver pretty much the same type of speeches – mostly anti-Congress statements – was a bad choice. The prime minister is meant for bigger things. A certain mystique is likely to be beneficial this time round.

In the final analysis, the BJP has to realise that technology alone cannot deliver a message. Neither can the media blitz that accompanied a new leader in elections five years ago be replicated.  The prime minister himself can hardly keep mouthing statistics of growth. For one, they are likely to be disbelieved. For another, they’re difficult to deliver in fulsome language to an audience already suffering from a surfeit of electioneering. Certainly, the prime minister must continue to do what he does best, which is to talk directly to his audience. But then, there is a limit to even his energy. The alternative is to use others to spread his message. Not the jaded ministers of his cabinet, but the youngest and brightest of his “karyakartas”, and as many local leaders as possible to strengthen a base that is likely to be eroded by his own party’s affiliates. Target audiences need easily understood and well-structured facts about the real and many achievements of this government that directly affected their lives in a particular district or state. Keep it simple in substance. Voters are far from being fools. As the AIR survey indicated, it was the real issues – like Beti Padhao – that got them hooked. Cursing the Congress is already passé and the interview probably underscored that.

The prime minister’s recent interview with ANI which marked the launch of the poll season was unusual enough to make most people watch at least parts of it. The trouble was that it was 90 minutes long, which meant that for a whole generation accustomed to communicating in 280 characters, it was simply unwatchable. That’s a pity. For the interviewee did have something to say. The gargantuan interview covered all issues, including the Ram Mandir, corruption, farmers’ woes and even the Rafale deal. At one point, Modi very reasonably asks why middlemen are involved at all. At another point, he is almost emotional on the tension involving the “surgical strike”, while he appeals for better understanding of the costs of demonetisation. Then is the expected presentation of data to measure success. Modi is vibrant in speech. In cold hard text, the interview is simply not strong enough because too many issues were crammed together.

But then that’s the problem with the BJP’s strategic communication. It’s caught between the cleft of modern technology and actual message delivery. This is surprising to say the least. “Brand Modi” won a landslide victory with his team using all social platforms, sometimes responding in real time, to deliver a message of change and vibrancy. As marketing experts noted, Narendra Modi brought the BJP out of obscurity and irrelevance in much the same way that the IMac and IPod brought Apple centre stage. Modi the brand won the landslide victory. The party itself was only a vehicle.
Narendra Modi during the interview on Wednesday. ANI

Narendra Modi during the interview on Wednesday. ANI

Ironically, five years later, it’s the party’s image that has become larger and is tarnishing the Modi brand. The BJP and its ideologues have managed to get more public space than the man who won the war. In short, the core messaging that is being put across emanates from the party — thus the “Ram Mandir” rallies, the cow slaughter issue, vigilantism and the increasingly anti-minority debate that is spilling virulently onto Twitter. It is not that the BJP or its affiliates, the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh or the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, were doing anything different from the past. They just had a far larger platform than before, which meant that they were prime media material. The prime minister was not. As The Washington Post noted, on most issues that came up on national television – as different from issues of national importance – he was silent. While it is entirely true that a prime minister cannot be expected to comment on every subject, the fact remains that his media managers erred in not reinforcing the earlier image of a “strong man” who could crack the whip when required. In common with much of the world, Indians love a tough no-nonsense strongman who may veer dangerously close to being a dictator.  When he is seen as caving in to the mob, the glitter fades irretrievably.

But Modi does speak, and often. His Twitter account seems to have thousands upon thousands of followers, even ruling out the bots and fakes. Whoever manages his account, keeps it updated, even if not madly interesting. The weekly Mann ki Baat launched on 3 October, 2014 had undoubtedly generated a lot of interest in a country where prime ministers are rarely seen or heard. It also generated some Rs 5 crore for All India Radio annually. Covering 92 percent of India’s territory, and nearly 100 percent of the population, it is the ideal vehicle for a direct outreach to all corners of India, and to the lowest strata. The merchants, traders, vegetable vendors and tobacco sellers are all certain to have a small radio blaring somewhere. It isn’t clear how many actually listen, but a survey by the AIR did show that listeners were (unsurprisingly) maximum in Gujarat, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh. The lowest were in the south, particularly in Andhra Pradesh. That’s unsurprising too. That level of pure Hindi is probably unintelligible on the other side of the Vindhyas. One way of reducing the mismatch is to simplify the Hindi and the subjects introduced. AIR should try to make it less of a lecture and more of a fireside conversation. Also, given that it may have lost its novelty somewhat, also shift it to a major event class, rather than a weekly monologue.

Then, there are websites like 'My Gov’ which is meant to showcase the government’s achievements and also take in suggestions from the public. Any attempt to register on this site and submit a suggestion is exhausting. The larger “transforming India” website is impressive in terms of statistics that, however, have no link that will give them a measure of believability. A link to the source of these statistics would be useful for anyone wanting details on, for instance, the complete electrification of India that Modi referred to in his interview. That is quite an achievement. The point is that the data should be freely available. The Niti Aayog website is better, with its links to various data sites and a bank of good information and presentations. What would be really useful is readily available infographics with embedded data on health, specific assistance to farmers and even perhaps data on the benefits of demonetisation that was supposed to bring money into the white economy. The prime minister in his interview had the figures on his fingertips. The rest of the nation doesn’t. It therefore relies on vague stories and fake news.

Underlying all of this is the fact that Modi is an outstanding speaker, especially when compared to his predecessor. The fact that the old magic still works was recently apparent in his address at Port Blair, which showcased his ability to sway a crowd that probably understood only half of what he said. But his powerful presence was clearly not enough to sway the recent elections, where the BJP lost heavily. Moreover there is the issue of over exposure. The reliance on one man to deliver pretty much the same type of speeches – mostly anti-Congress statements – was a bad choice. The prime minister is meant for bigger things. A certain mystique is likely to be beneficial this time round.

In the final analysis, the BJP has to realise that technology alone cannot deliver a message. Neither can the media blitz that accompanied a new leader in elections five years ago be replicated.  The prime minister himself can hardly keep mouthing statistics of growth. For one, they are likely to be disbelieved. For another, they’re difficult to deliver in fulsome language to an audience already suffering from a surfeit of electioneering. Certainly, the prime minister must continue to do what he does best, which is to talk directly to his audience. But then, there is a limit to even his energy. The alternative is to use others to spread his message. Not the jaded ministers of his cabinet, but the youngest and brightest of his “karyakartas”, and as many local leaders as possible to strengthen a base that is likely to be eroded by his own party’s affiliates. Target audiences need easily understood and well-structured facts about the real and many achievements of this government that directly affected their lives in a particular district or state. Keep it simple in substance. Voters are far from being fools. As the AIR survey indicated, it was the real issues – like Beti Padhao – that got them hooked. Cursing the Congress is already passé and the interview probably underscored that.