Conservative revolution
Noted: On the surface, reserved communication may seem to build trust. At its core, however, it is boring and reactionary, writes Kenneth Angst.
Column Restrained communication may seem to build trust on the surface. At its core, however, it is boring and reactionary, writes Kenneth Angst: "Every era has its esprit, its communication style, its leading class. The seventies, for example, were characterized by left-wing intellectualism. The arguments were ideological, conceptual and top-heavy, class- and culture-fighting. In the eighties, the gut rebelled against the head, the individual against the collective. Communication was highly personalized, narcissistic and sometimes egomaniacal, and in the nineties there was a dynamic symbiosis between materialism and hedonism, a norm- and rule-breaking, but ultimately social Darwinist coalition of market and individual anarchy. In the Ich-AG, anything that was fun and made as much money as possible was allowed. Above all, however, anything that created public awareness and social prestige - whatever that might be. Anyone who thought anything of themselves hired press spokespersons and PR staff, celebrated events, indulged in leadership rhetoric and bombarded journalists with tons of meaningless printed matter.
Today, however, we are under the spell of a never-ending economic, confidence and orientation crisis. A new, sometimes modest to humble, but often aggressive and opinionated conservatism of values is booming. Secure traditions are being proclaimed, but communicated with much greater restraint. After all, those who remain nobly silent make themselves more interesting, are less embarrassed and avoid the eternal clash of opinions. Instead of opening up and diversifying, the focus is once again on traditional strengths, competencies and truths. First create new facts, then have discussions again. In other words: marking instead of arguing, decreeing instead of arguing.
This behavior is a perfectly understandable reaction to the downsides of our late modern age, in which everything is subject to doubt and palaver. However, this does not change the fact that the new conservatism of values is ultimately boring and not only politically but also communicatively reactionary. Because the expansion of the social battle zone onto the battlefield of communication can no longer be reversed, and that is a good thing.
It is a good thing that active, comprehensive, convincing and therefore clever communication is essential if you want to make an impact and make a difference today. Whether as consumers, employees, investors, citizens or voters, people today are informed, selective and distrustful. They want to understand, participate and co-decide. Organizations and representatives that are still, or are once again, fiddling about this will sooner or later lose popularity, acceptance and success. The current conservative revolution will not change this. And that is a good thing.
> Kenneth Angst worked in the editorial offices of NZZ and Weltwoche and is now an independent consultant for political communication and public affairs.
Today, however, we are under the spell of a never-ending economic, confidence and orientation crisis. A new, sometimes modest to humble, but often aggressive and opinionated conservatism of values is booming. Secure traditions are being proclaimed, but communicated with much greater restraint. After all, those who remain nobly silent make themselves more interesting, are less embarrassed and avoid the eternal clash of opinions. Instead of opening up and diversifying, the focus is once again on traditional strengths, competencies and truths. First create new facts, then have discussions again. In other words: marking instead of arguing, decreeing instead of arguing.
This behavior is a perfectly understandable reaction to the downsides of our late modern age, in which everything is subject to doubt and palaver. However, this does not change the fact that the new conservatism of values is ultimately boring and not only politically but also communicatively reactionary. Because the expansion of the social battle zone onto the battlefield of communication can no longer be reversed, and that is a good thing.
It is a good thing that active, comprehensive, convincing and therefore clever communication is essential if you want to make an impact and make a difference today. Whether as consumers, employees, investors, citizens or voters, people today are informed, selective and distrustful. They want to understand, participate and co-decide. Organizations and representatives that are still, or are once again, fiddling about this will sooner or later lose popularity, acceptance and success. The current conservative revolution will not change this. And that is a good thing.
> Kenneth Angst worked in the editorial offices of NZZ and Weltwoche and is now an independent consultant for political communication and public affairs.
