Marcia, I think you really hit on a desperate need: A leader to make sense of it all (and by extension provide us with a vision and way forward). We got that from Reagan (Morning in America), Kennedy (New Frontier), Eisenhower (yes, Eisenhower who made it look easy), both Roosevelts, Lincoln and Washington.
However, considering the new "reality" of politics, messaging and media, I have to wonder how that would play.
Is the audience driving the messaging needs, or is it just the poor choices politicians are giving us to pick from. If so, how would that vision and "making sense of it all" play in Peoria?
Great input, Paul—and great question about context, rightly suggesting the "Fourth Estate" (mainstream media) had helped to distribute leader messaging, in its early days, to the masses. In today's world, the digital masses/crowds have power, too and leadership—even in politics, as in the workplace—is no longer successful without on-ramps to voter/worker input. Augmenting today’s troubled "Fourth Estate" in this new, fragmented media ecosystem are digital influencers, many who now translate and make relevant (re-contextualize) a leader's messages to their followers — then translate their followers' input (or their own takes) back to the leader. The Harris team has been innovating this 'call-and-response' framework these past months by understanding that effective messaging is continuously becoming more powerful when “translated” by selected influencers to new audiences and, therefore, made more interactive. New leaders need digital influencers and their audiences to help track the pulse of the crowd and distribute their change narratives (for better or worse), and vice versa. The reach and velocity of these interactive messaging loops (new bully pulpits?) can make a leader more (or less) powerful; in an ideal world, the truth wins and "Peoria" is enabled to have a louder voice and greater agency to participate. Some call these new messaging loops a type of new citizenship; others are using them to bring citizens together to share context and foster collaboration around solving some of society's most challenging problems, like figuring out how to become less vulnerable to disinformation, etc. New models are needed; we're in the early days of a new power era which, as you know, has promoted a form of collaborative activism that can be initiated by almost anyone, including bad actors as well as people previously ignored or overlooked. It is an exciting time of cross-sector innovation. It's also a challenging time. One of my favorite voices on the digital strongmen v angels debate and the subject of 'new power' is Henry Timms. Here’s an interview I had with him on “new power” some years back, relevant to your comment and question. (https://vimeo.com/835199029)
Thank you for being in conversation here with us! Your input is always terrific.
Marcia - your timing is on point - a great read before tonight's debate. What viewers "feel" about the candidates during and after this debate will certainly underscore who they will support in the voting booth! Emotional Intelligence reigns supreme in corporate leadership, and now, in politics!
Marcia, I think you really hit on a desperate need: A leader to make sense of it all (and by extension provide us with a vision and way forward). We got that from Reagan (Morning in America), Kennedy (New Frontier), Eisenhower (yes, Eisenhower who made it look easy), both Roosevelts, Lincoln and Washington.
However, considering the new "reality" of politics, messaging and media, I have to wonder how that would play.
Is the audience driving the messaging needs, or is it just the poor choices politicians are giving us to pick from. If so, how would that vision and "making sense of it all" play in Peoria?
Great input, Paul—and great question about context, rightly suggesting the "Fourth Estate" (mainstream media) had helped to distribute leader messaging, in its early days, to the masses. In today's world, the digital masses/crowds have power, too and leadership—even in politics, as in the workplace—is no longer successful without on-ramps to voter/worker input. Augmenting today’s troubled "Fourth Estate" in this new, fragmented media ecosystem are digital influencers, many who now translate and make relevant (re-contextualize) a leader's messages to their followers — then translate their followers' input (or their own takes) back to the leader. The Harris team has been innovating this 'call-and-response' framework these past months by understanding that effective messaging is continuously becoming more powerful when “translated” by selected influencers to new audiences and, therefore, made more interactive. New leaders need digital influencers and their audiences to help track the pulse of the crowd and distribute their change narratives (for better or worse), and vice versa. The reach and velocity of these interactive messaging loops (new bully pulpits?) can make a leader more (or less) powerful; in an ideal world, the truth wins and "Peoria" is enabled to have a louder voice and greater agency to participate. Some call these new messaging loops a type of new citizenship; others are using them to bring citizens together to share context and foster collaboration around solving some of society's most challenging problems, like figuring out how to become less vulnerable to disinformation, etc. New models are needed; we're in the early days of a new power era which, as you know, has promoted a form of collaborative activism that can be initiated by almost anyone, including bad actors as well as people previously ignored or overlooked. It is an exciting time of cross-sector innovation. It's also a challenging time. One of my favorite voices on the digital strongmen v angels debate and the subject of 'new power' is Henry Timms. Here’s an interview I had with him on “new power” some years back, relevant to your comment and question. (https://vimeo.com/835199029)
Thank you for being in conversation here with us! Your input is always terrific.
wonderful article..
Thank you, John! And thank you for your continued readership!
Marcia - your timing is on point - a great read before tonight's debate. What viewers "feel" about the candidates during and after this debate will certainly underscore who they will support in the voting booth! Emotional Intelligence reigns supreme in corporate leadership, and now, in politics!
Thanks, Lynne! EQ to the rescue!
Thanks, Marcia! This is a wonderful article to prepare us for viewing tonight's debate. I'm sharing with all my friends!
Helen
Thank you, Helen, for your note. We truly appreciate your input and readership!