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...
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
.JPG)
No comments:
Post a Comment