TV appearances don't necessarily translate well on the radio

I have focused on the vocal and performance side of the TV debates in my last blogs and emails. It was interesting to watch this short video following the final debate on Thursday night. Some undecided voters watched the debate on TV; seven others listened on the radio. The sample then voted on who had 'won' the debate. It was an interesting result: on the radio Gordon Brown made more of an impact; on the TV Clegg did.

Here is the video

Whilst the sample of 7 is very small, it was interesting to note that the vocal performance of GB was significantly more engaging on the radio where the more media savvy DC and NC made more of an impact visually on the TV. I have mentioned in previous blogs that impact is not JUST the visual appearance, but the vocal one too. In a different age, when TV was not such a powerful and immediate communication stream, the result of the election might be very different.

So we come to our three leaders. How did they perform on Thursday from a vocal point of view. As a performance, we had two leaders who were performing both faces of Janus: one leader looking backwards and reflecting on his experience and what an advantage this would be for the company, the other looking forward; encouraging voters not to dwell on the past but to have a change to move the country out of the recession.

David Cameron: This chap has worked hard. Following his first appearance, he has really upped his game; taking a number of tips from his rival NC. He looked much more comfortable; he engaged with the live audience as well as looking into the camera at times for the TV audience. His speech was measured, with him consciously speaking slowly and clearly. The impact of speaking slowly and clearly: particularly if you have a resonant voice, gives the impression of confidence and authority. This was something DC projected well. His deliveries were confident, and the voice was lower pitched, unlike the first week; he didn't appear frightened but gave the impression he could lead the country and deliver some alternatives to the present economic plans.

Nick Clegg: Ah, Nick Clegg, the media savvy politician. Everyone has learnt from NC's media performance: look in the camera; flicker your eye lashes; mention the questioner's name etc. However, NC looked uneasy and vocally, his throat was closed causing the voice to be weaker. It gave the impression of someone that was out of his depth, lacking confidence and uncomfortable. In addition to this, his posture was less confident than before. His shoulders were slightly up and forward leading to tension in his upper chest/neck and shoulders area: hence the unclear voice. Given the dynamics of GB and DC trying to out punch each other, NC had become the uncomfortable spectator and occasionally chipped in with appropriate hand swinging. He was still engaging when he had his space to speak, but it is interesting to note that he didn't score very well with the sample LISTENING to him on the radio. He adopted the tactic of repeated 3 or 4 key messages: again and again... If you were to close your eyes when he speaks, you would receive a number of different messages about him, what he has to say and what he thinks about himself. He is a very good visual actor.

Gordon Brown; Ah, poor Gordon. Suffering from 'mic-gaff' the day before did not put him in the most positive frame of mind. Physically and visually, GB looked like a broken man; much older than the other two leaders; posture was defeated and he looked tired and pale. He was still aggressive towards the other two leaders, although Dimbleby managed the situation well: preventing GB talking over the other two, too much. He was leaning in - weight on the balls of his feet. However, there was a tone in the voice which suggested a level of desperation.
Interestingly, his performance came across far more positively on the radio, with the sample voting 6:1 in his favour. He has the advantage of a lower pitched voice, which gives the impression of experience, power and authority. He was also clear and direct in his message that he had experience of dealing with the 'World Stage'. Visually, his body language prevented him conveying this, but on the radio, the voice was able to show this 'role'.

In the end, it will be fascinating to see how the election pans out on Thursday. The three leaders have all developed their skills throughout the three TV debates. In order to impact further, I would like to see NC and DC focus on their voices - DC to find a way of dropping the tone of his voice to add gravitas to his performance; NC to relax his jaw, neck, shoulders and upper chest area. This will lead to his voice becoming more resonant. For GB: he needs to think about raising the voice production into his resonating chambers in the face. This will lead to the voice being far more focused. Also, he needs to lift up his ribcage so that he can take deeper, more relaxed breaths. This posture would assist in him conveying a more confident, less broken persona...

More details of our course Speak, Connect Engage

Election TV Debate: they all learnt from Nick's performance

After the first TV debate last week, there was increased hype as to how the main protagonists were going to fare under the spotlight. Despite walking the talk, David Cameron had been poorly advised by his team and underperformed in the first debate; Gordon Brown had adopted the 'Father of the Nation' role: to limited success. So it was left to Nick Clegg to schmooze, flirt, engage viewers and win the pollsters vote - for now...

Well: both GB and DC adopted NC's style of looking into the camera and addressing the audience. I still can't understand why they didn't do this last time, but they had to listen to their advisors.... Everyone was on the attack and this led to a more animated debate with some interesting discussions. We all like a good verbal scrap. I should mention that Adam Boulton was an effective chairman, who managed GB better and let the other two leaders have their say more easily.

I am focusing on the verbal impact and the performance side of the debate; how the three men came across; how they engaged and some possible changes that need to be made for the last debate.

Nick Clegg: The golden boy of the first debate was still basking on the success of his first performance. The knives were out for him; he'd had a smear campaign in the press and his policies had been questioned. He was attacked by both DC and GB, but maintained a relaxed composure, with the Mr Sad face not making too many appearances. However, I was concerned about the quality of his voice. The impact he made would have been significantly less on the radio. From the start he had a 'tight' throat, resulting in a less than resonant voice. His nerves showed in his voice and it lacked authority, confidence and trustworthiness. Given that his physical appearance was still good; he engaged well on the TV screen and with the audience (although he wasn't calling people by name) and his posture was good, this impacted less on the screen than on the radio, where listeners couldn't read his body language. I have mentioned the vocal relaxation exercises on the website, but do give me a call Nick if you want some specific one's for your problem. This needs to be addressed by next week.

David Cameron: I had been very disappointed for DC last week as he under performed. This week he was so much better, and presumably his original advisors are now having a prolonged stay in Siberia. DC looked into the TV camera; his posture was much better: I even saw him putting weight on the front foot (yeah!); he looked confident, commanding and no longer intimidated and annoyed by GB. Vocally, his voice was far stronger and he was able to maintain a lower pitch: thus avoiding the slight 'whining' voice that was apparent last week. Instead of his nerves and frustrations showing in his voice, he was able to maintain a calm albeit confident vocal presence. For next week, DC's homework is to practice placing his voice at a lower pitch when GB talks over him. Remain focused when you are interrupted; drop the voice and you will still be audible. Also, when this happens, raise the volume of your voice, but watch that your voice doesn't RAISE in pitch, so consciously think of speaking LOWER! Good luck!

Gordon Brown: GB did everything to excuse the fact he isn't Media friendly by his first address; substance over PR spin, which is ironic given that New Labour have been masters of spin in the last 15 years. A good try GB, but these are words of a desperate man. GB adopted the role of 'Elder Statesman' again; referring to the 'World Stage' and crises he has been involved in, he used the 'experience' card. Physically, he looked into the camera to engage viewers, but more work needs to be done, to be more effective. His posture was authoritative; confident and 'powerful' with him on the front foot and very much in attack mode. GB has a vocal advantage over his rivals since his voice is significantly deeper; this gives the impression of gravitas and authority and he is more audible when two people are speaking. He could have used this to even more advantage by slowing down his speech and adopting dramatic pauses, but no: he went on the attack and tried to steamroller the other speakers into submission. He gave no impression that he listened to other's views, instead adopting a sneer. Is this the behaviour of a leader? Finally, he attempted humour; his swipe at the other leaders appearing to argue like his sons in the bath was cheap; not funny and lost him some credibility. Humour is very powerful, but subject matter and timing are crucial. What does GB need to work on for next week: he has every advantage, experience, confidence, a powerful presence and vocal quality, yet at the moment he is wasting these. He needs to calm down; stop attacking others and focus on what he is saying. Putting more weight onto his heels, he would be able to balance himself better. He needs to listen to what others are say and internalise his personal thoughts on the others, to avoid him looking cheap.

Executive Voice are co-hosting a masterclass in engaging clients, colleagues and audiences on 7th July in Central London Click here for more details

Tonight's Debate: what the party leaders' need from their Fairy Godmother

If I was the party leaders' Fairy Godmother, what would I provide, in order they had their wish fulfilled. I am assuming their wishes will to perform well; to engage with the electorate, and to improve their popularity.

Gordon Brown: Gordon didn't have a particularly good performance last week. Many people noticed that he interrupted the other candidates (particularly David Cameron); he was aggressive and talked over other people speaking. He didn't listen either. As an effective leader, people are looking for someone who listens to other ideas, rather than shouting them down. Gordon would be advised to take a step back; count three before he jumps in when someone else is speaking and to engage with the audience - one by using their names and by looking into the TV camera. I am sure he will be on the attack to Nick Clegg and given the smearing today, there will be ammunition available for him to use.

Nick Clegg: Nick had a fantastic response to his performance last week. Not only did he flirt with the studio audience and TV audience; he looked straight into the camera, engaging viewers. He also used questioners' names and made friends with them. He played 'hard to get' with Gordon Brown who was schmoozing up to him. However, I have no recollection of what he said. His performance was very effective and made an impact, but viewers will be expecting to find out more about his policies and whether or not he can walk the talk. The other leaders will be on the attack, so he needs to watch his back and have some convincing responses to their queries over his effectiveness. Also he will have to fight off the repercussions of the smear campaign. This evening will either make or break him.

David Cameron: David was a real disappointment on Thursday. A good guy who has excellent ideas and speaks well was over shadowed by the other leaders. He also looked uncomfortable; his body language was ineffective and vocally his voice became strained. He was, however, the only leader that said something I still remember..... David needs to relax; move his weight onto the balls of his feet. He also needs to look at the camera, do the name game; keep speaking LOUDER when GB tries to interrupt him and keep going. He also needs to start questioning GB's comments rather than shaking his head. My last advice would be to look GB in the eye and keep the eye stare. It would be interesting to see how GB reacts to that on Live TV.......

Good luck boys!

Executive Voice are running a course on using the voice to Engage clients and colleagues. Called "Speak, Connect, Engage" on 7th July in Central London Information on the course. Many of the issues I discuss in this blog are covered in the masterclass.

How was the vocal performance of the leaders in the TV Debate?

Many apologies for the tardiness of this email report. Vertigo; writing at the computer and using your brain don't go hand in hand!

I don't know about you, but I really enjoyed the first 30 minutes of the debate; I then got bored. There have been plenty of comments on the performance of the three leaders. From a body language perspective, none are better than the excellent Peter Collett who appeared on Sky News. The impact of the debate has affected the polls, with the Lib Dems doing remarkably well at the moment BUT polls are one thing; it is what happens in the voting booths that matter.....

As Peter Collett mentioned, two's company, three's a crowd and this was perfectly illustrated by this debate and the dynamics between the three. Nick Clegg was the one they wanted to be friends with; GB clearly was smoozing with him, whilst deliberately leaving out DC. NC was playing hard to get. DC was the 'piggy in the middle'; left out with 'no mates'. Avoid Threes where possible!

There is no doubt that Nick Clegg had a fantastic result from his performance. THere were notable skills he used:

• Looking straight at the camera to engage viewers.
• Using first names for people who had asked questions.
• Bending the rules when talking to people in the audience.
• Open, confident, professional body language. For readers who have attended Executive Voice's workshops and one to one coaching sessions, he had a classic 'Divo' posture, which was non-threatening, professional, open and enabled his voice to be engaging, clear and interesting to listen to.
• HOWEVER - under stress, he makes his mouth into a 'Mr Sad' :( If you do this now, you will feel that tension develops in the jaw area; throat and back of the tongue. This impacts on his voice by creating a 'strangulated' sound. He needs to relax this area For jaw relaxation exercises go to the Executive Voice website
• He came across as trustworthy, in touch with the public and willing to 'work things out'.
  
• It was a very good performance - although I have little recollection of what he said.

Next David Cameron who, in my opinion, underperformed. I noticed

• He was physically on the back foot.
  
• His weight was actually on his back foot and this impacted on his performance by giving the impression he didn't want to be there.
  
• His energy was being used to prevent him falling over backwards.
  
• It prevented him from projecting his voice and personality.
• He didn't engage with the audience - both in the studio or the TV audience.
• He looked awkward, frightened and weak (in my opinion.)
• His voice was high pitched and strangulated. He was in a lot of discomfort - possibly from being so close physically to Gordon Brown.
• Looking broodily into the distance works for Clint Eastwood in a Spaghetti Opera, but not for a political debate. He looked silly and didn't engage.
• One positive; his stories and examples were very powerful and I do remember some key messages he said.
• For people that have worked with me, he showed classic examples of 'The Mouse' in his posture; no energy or engagement was coming from him, and he didn't invite engagement from his audience.

Finally Gordon Brown. In fairness I was spending a lot of time shouting at the TV saying "But you've had 13 years to sort this out!" Etc... However, here are my comments: I have tried not to be biased.

• Gordon Brown adopted the 'Elder Statesman' persona in the group, with confidence, solid body language.
• Gordon's low pitched voice added gravitas and experience to what he said.
• HOWEVER, because he has a tendency to drop his jaw, the actual voice drops from some of his resonating chambers resulting in a less focused voice which lacks clarity. It becomes more difficult to hear what he's saying.
• He spoke slowly and concisely to create the 'Elder Stateman' persona.
• He was aggressive, physically (he leaned on his lectern a lot) and 'Gave the eye' to David Cameron. I believe he intimidated DC.
• Vocally he was aggressive in a quiet, demanding way.
  
• He didn't play fair - he was for ever talking over DC and butting in, preventing DC from completing sentences and being heard.
• He jumped down from the stage to shake hands with the audience, leaving the other two leaders looking like school boys.
• There was no two way engagement with the audience; it was one way - listen to me, but no eye contact with the camera. He wasn't warm.

I will be very interested to see what happens this Thursday. Adam Boulton has his work cut out managing the debate. I am sure every second has been analysed by the researchers and advisors for each of the leaders and that NC will be the main target of attack this time!

For more information about Executive Voice go to http://www.executivevoice.co.uk