Frank Luntz
While we were watching documentaries on marketing we heard from Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist who worked primarily as a pollster. Luntz is touted as one of the most influential individuals in the marketing of the Republican party. With such great prowess, how does he aggregate support for his party and promote their platform? Although one may assume that he uses copious amounts of statistical data and revolutionary techniques, Luntz primarily runs focus groups. He is so prolific in this pursuit that he leads over 100 focus groups per year. With regards to his practice he has a very simple ideology, “80 percent of our life is emotion, and only 20 percent is intellect”. Frank Luntz focuses much more on the syntax and verbiage around issues rather than the specific details of the issue. Within each focus group, he primarily focuses on showing them specific language in order to see their reaction. He further asks them to propose their own specific language. He pursues these keys words in the hope that he can evoke emotion. His argument behind the overemphasis on emotion is, “that words and emotion together are the most powerful force known to mankind”. This premise is the basis around his theory that words apply to policy and the goal of a good marketer is to sell an idea. If one is able to utilize vocabulary that elicits an emotional response they will better be able to sell the idea.
All of his theories seem logical. However, Luntz strong focus on emotional language has been displayed effectively in altering the conversation and selling one’s argument. For example, Luntz recommended that Bush administration refers to "global warming" as “climate change”. This slight shift insinuates that the changes are a natural shift in nature that is not affected by humans. Similarly, in guiding politicians on how to talk about the Palestine Israel conflict, Luntz recommends that they refer to the “two-state solution” and its goals as demands because people have an innate disdain for demands. Overall, Luntz exploits one of the major factors in marketing, our emotion, and linguistics.
You are absolutely correct. A careful choice of words can completely change a person's perspective or emotions of a situation or object. A change in emotions can lead to a change in consumer decisions. Luntz explained that "estate tax" sounded like a worthy democratic tax. However, if it was phrased instead as "death tax", people would see the tax as unfair and cruel.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Peter! I thought you articulated the strategy behind Luntz's tactics very well. It is fascinating to learn about these marketing techniques and to see them in action right now. Many of the commercials on TV have been using emotional language for bill such as Prop 8 and Prop 10 to try and sway voters in favor of the advertiser's opinion, exactly like Luntz does with his campaigns.
ReplyDeleteFrank Luntz is an absolute genius in the world of political marketing and messaging. His psychological analysis with the emotions of people is what ultimately allows him to craft campaigns effectively. His first start in mainstream politics was to help write the famous 1994 Contract with America with Newt Gingrich. But more recently, he's spent time focusing on whether Americans truly know what is actually right, and in this Atlantic piece on him explains his concern for the direction of American politics.
ReplyDeleteSource: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/the-agony-of-frank-luntz/282766/
Luntz is very, very aware of a concept that I learned in statistics last year called "wording bias." In a survey project that I conducted last year, I found that two questions, though logically equal, if worded differently, can have wildly different results. For example, the two questions: "How terrible is Trump's foreign policy?" and "Describe your thoughts on President Trump's foreign policy." will likely have vastly different results, with the discrepancy being caused by wording bias.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Peter! I wonder what Luntz thinks about the work he is doing. Is he convinced of the messages that he tries to send to the people? If he isn't, how does he reconcile the fact that he essentially manipulates people with language? I think it's quite interesting to have to balance those things in one's profession. On one hand, it's his job to build support and advertise the values of a certain party or organization. On the other hand, he's manipulating people's attitudes through subtle and unconscious biases towards wording and presentation. In the article that Noah posted, Luntz said that he's worried that American people can no longer be persuaded. He says that Americans are more and more divided and set in their beliefs, making it hard to get support for policies the people don't initially like. I would have to agree with him in acknowledging that is a problem. I have no problems with principles, and I believe in having principles that I stand by without hesitation. However, I also believe in being open-minded, just as Luntz (I think) does himself. Persuasion when used correctly is a powerful tool, and there is a notable loss of that power in today's political climate.
ReplyDelete