It is not only since the result of the vote on the minaret ban initiative that I have noticed the glaring contradiction between the reality of life and media perception, between public and published opinion. Too many movers and shakers in politics, communications and the media seem to have distanced themselves too far from the grassroots for whom they claim to work.
Sometimes I think it would be good for many black-robed opinion leaders to live in Münchenbuchsee or Sirnach instead of in the chic lofts in Kreis 5. They would then have their nightcap in the "Bären" or the "Frohsinn" and not in a fancy bar with white walls and photo art by Annelis Strba on them. There might be something of Rolf Knie on the wall or, in a worst-case scenario, good old General Guisan - but our black-robed friends would be closer to the everyday worries and life priorities of the customers who ultimately pay their wages and fees.
To name just one example, what a fuss they made in all the newspapers and on all the channels about "Pepperminta", the film by Pipilotti Rist, who was named the most important living Swiss artist by a mysterious agreement between the art trade and the art critics associated with it. The curious film was met with rapturous admiration, and anyone who dared to exclaim: "The Empress is naked ..." was treated like the caller in Andersen's fairy tale: like a small child. Pipilotti has to be seen as good and important, otherwise you are hopelessly out.
But the quality of the pudding is proven when you eat it. So how did the audience vote at the box office? In 2009, "Pepperminta" recorded a total of 14,272 admissions to cinemas - roughly the same number as the Entlebucher Anzeiger has readers per issue. All Swiss films together - and almost every new release is treated as a top event by the media - accounted for just 3.2 percent of cinema admissions sold in Switzerland last year. It is unlikely that this "market performance" will encourage modesty among local filmmakers. With a matter-of-factness that no other type of cultural creator in this country can match, filmmakers reach out their hollow hands for state cultural funding for every project. Meanwhile, one book publisher after another goes over the Jordan without the Department of Home Affairs or one of these many enterprising communal and cantonal cultural administrators coming up with anything clever to promote them.
The flow of communication between the top and the bottom also runs in the opposite direction again and again - unfortunately just when the communication goals are achieved, i.e. when a message manages, contrary to expectations, to penetrate the thick layer of disinterest and really touch people. How was it with this teaser campaign by the Federal Social Insurance Office ("Disabled people are just on our backs ...")? The people affected and the administrators of those affected cried out - wonderful, that was proof that the campaign had worked, i.e. that it had made people wonder for a moment, even caused an uproar. What more can you expect from good advertising? And what is the new Federal Councillor Didier Burkhalter doing at the beginning of his term of office? He buckles before the lobbyists and hastily bans the continuation of the campaign - "canceled due to great success", so to speak. The message is not encrypted: Federal campaigns are tolerated as long as they don't really work. As soon as they strike a nerve, they are banned.
The same hypocrisy prevails here as in the case of "Pepperminta". In reality, you don't want to expose your offer, your message to the harsh climate of the market; you'd rather please your peers: To feign activity, not to exaggerate, not to offend - and when the nerve is struck, to immediately flinch, apologize, ban and abort. The intellectuals with their retrospective protests against the minaret vote, the cultural mafia in the "Pepperminta" case, the lobbyists and the federal office interpretation administrators in the case of the IV campaign - they are all guilty of the same crime: disregarding reality and the signals it sends out (which are demonstrably earlier and more clearly recognizable in Münchenbuchsee and Sirnach than in Seefeld or Kreis 5).
This kind of cowardice in the daily battle for attention is punishable by disregard. There is no appeal against this.

This article appeared in the Werbewoche print edition of December 17, 2009.

It is not only since the result of the vote on the minaret ban initiative that I have noticed the glaring contradiction between the reality of life and media perception, between public and published opinion. Too many movers and shakers in politics, communications and the media seem to have distanced themselves too far from the grassroots for whom they claim to work.
Sometimes I think it would be good for many black-robed opinion leaders to live in Münchenbuchsee or Sirnach instead of in the chic lofts in Kreis 5. They would then have their nightcap in the "Bären" or the "Frohsinn" and not in a fancy bar with white walls and photo art by Annelis Strba on them. There might be something of Rolf Knie on the wall or, in a worst-case scenario, good old General Guisan - but our black-robed friends would be closer to the everyday worries and life priorities of the customers who ultimately pay their wages and fees.
To name just one example, what a fuss they made in all the newspapers and on all the channels about "Pepperminta", the film by Pipilotti Rist, who was named the most important living Swiss artist by a mysterious agreement between the art trade and the art critics associated with it. The curious film was met with rapturous admiration, and anyone who dared to exclaim: "The Empress is naked ..." was treated like the caller in Andersen's fairy tale: like a small child. Pipilotti has to be seen as good and important, otherwise you are hopelessly out.
But the quality of the pudding is proven when you eat it. So how did the audience vote at the box office? In 2009, "Pepperminta" recorded a total of 14,272 admissions to cinemas - roughly the same number as the Entlebucher Anzeiger has readers per issue. All Swiss films together - and almost every new release is treated as a top event by the media - accounted for just 3.2 percent of cinema admissions sold in Switzerland last year. It is unlikely that this "market performance" will encourage modesty among local filmmakers. With a matter-of-factness that no other type of cultural creator in this country can match, filmmakers reach out their hollow hands for state cultural funding for every project. Meanwhile, one book publisher after another goes over the Jordan without the Department of Home Affairs or one of these many enterprising communal and cantonal cultural administrators coming up with anything clever to promote them.
The flow of communication between the top and the bottom also runs in the opposite direction again and again - unfortunately just when the communication goals are achieved, i.e. when a message manages, contrary to expectations, to penetrate the thick layer of disinterest and really touch people. How was it with this teaser campaign by the Federal Social Insurance Office ("Disabled people are just on our backs ...")? The people affected and the administrators of those affected cried out - wonderful, that was proof that the campaign had worked, i.e. that it had made people wonder for a moment, even caused an uproar. What more can you expect from good advertising? And what is the new Federal Councillor Didier Burkhalter doing at the beginning of his term of office? He buckles before the lobbyists and hastily bans the continuation of the campaign - "canceled due to great success", so to speak. The message is not encrypted: Federal campaigns are tolerated as long as they don't really work. As soon as they strike a nerve, they are banned.
The same hypocrisy prevails here as in the case of "Pepperminta". In reality, you don't want to expose your offer, your message to the harsh climate of the market; you'd rather please your peers: To feign activity, not to exaggerate, not to offend - and when the nerve is struck, to immediately flinch, apologize, ban and abort. The intellectuals with their retrospective protests against the minaret vote, the cultural mafia in the "Pepperminta" case, the lobbyists and the federal office interpretation administrators in the case of the IV campaign - they are all guilty of the same crime: disregarding reality and the signals it sends out (which are demonstrably earlier and more clearly recognizable in Münchenbuchsee and Sirnach than in Seefeld or Kreis 5).
This kind of cowardice in the daily battle for attention is punishable by disregard. There is no appeal against this.