Two people couldn’t be more dissimilar than Barrack Obama and Sarah Palin. Besides their huge political, racial and cultural differences, one is cerebral, buttoned up and calm, the other is fast-talking, emotional and seemingly spontaneous. One hot, one cold. But if you look closer, you might find some important similarities in their impact – which tell us a lot about why people are drawn to them as politicians.
Their interesting personal stories create the context for any message they may deliver as candidates, illustrating why stories that mesh with an audience’s experiences or desires are what is remembered and embraced. Call it the Oprah Factor, because she knows how to bring out the stories of other people – from kings to the homeless – in ways that resonate for all of us.
On the surface, Obama’s and Palin’s similarities suggest the typical rags-to-riches success that all Americans like. They both come from humble backgrounds. Check. They both overcame significant obstacles to achieve success. Check. And they were viewed as outsiders to the inner circle of national politics. Check. We love that.
But dig deeper, and we can see something of our own aspirations in these individuals. Obama – struggling with his identity as a young man from a broken home, living with his “greatest generation” grandparents, working his way to an elite college, then giving up lucrative career paths to work in the streets of Chicago as a community organizer and eventually raising a lovely family with a wife whose father was a sanitation worker. Is there a sense of nobility in Obama? Yes. But a huge number of African Americans and white middle class voters saw in him their better selves or a romanticism in his triumph over humble roots, whether they directly identified with his experience or not.
Palin, of course, epitomizes stable, middle-class, frontier values – from her working class neighborhood to her cheerleading in high school, to her moose hunting and fishing, to her family dynamics. Even the pregnancy of her teenage daughter is excusable by her fans, because we see these problems everyday, even in our own families. She’s one of us. Her hard-charging confidence and snubbing of the “elites” is just another version of the little guy frustrating the powerful. Who doesn’t like that?
The point: We strongly identify with a message when we can see something of ourselves in the story. In fact, the story is the message. From two remarkably different personalities, like Obama and Palin, to the newly slim celebrities featured in WeightWatcher’s commercials, the deeper truth we hold onto is not in the stars but in ourselves.
I think this article is very important for people who want to understand why certain celebrities and politicians grab their attention. I don’t completely understand the fascination that any of these three people holds for millions around the world but what you say about their backgrounds, and how we relate to that is terrific. My question to you is this. Do you think it is a subconscious thing, or perhaps subliminal? Thanks for your answer in advance.
@Catrina L.
Thank you for your comment. I believe we have a natural tendency to be drawn to what is familiar (and comfortable) based on our life experience, so, yes, I do think it’s largely a subconscious or visceral reaction. That’s why people involved in communications must have a strong understanding of their audience’s experiences and perceptions in order to communicate with impact.
Fascinating take on two seemingly very different people in and leading the news today. The story is what connects. That’s why Don’s points are important to keep in mind as we analyze positions on policy. Can we remove the story or back-story that attracts us from the position?
Thanks for the perspective.
Thanks for the insight Don….I think you have touched on something very fundamental that I hadn’t quite grasped until you crystalized it. Looking forward to more Heymann wisdom!
Neat juxtaposition of two seamingly polar oppposites. I think we all relate to what’s familiar and comfortable which innately affords trust. From there we need to be careful because what you see and hear isn’t what you always get, most definitively in politics.
Exactly!
Good thoughts, Don. Equally interesting is the fierce antipathy that Obama and Palin generate from those who oppose or dislike them. What is it about these two that can produce such strong negative feelings? It’s certainly more than partisanship. And while personal narrative can explain the bonding of supporters, it seems less persuasive about the opposition. Each one seems to have an abundance of certain qualities that can really get under some peoples’ skins. I think each in his and her own way seems to project an attitude that comes across as disdain and rejection. Obama can seem insufferably intellectual, condescending and elitist. Palin comes off as relentlessly middle-brow, simplistic and anti-intellectual. If you see yourself on the wrong side of either of these powerful tendencies, it can be infuriating!