Has political research become the ultimate exercise in narcissism?

I’ve been listening in on more focus groups recently. Struck by how Rory Sutherland was a little dismissive of this method of research on the Politics for Drummies podcast, I wanted to see if they do offer up short-sighted reactions on political issues and can be easily distorted by one noisy person, as Rory pointed out.

I’m more in the camp of the Bangor to Brighton troubadour Ren, who says that busking gives him a deeper feeling about the way people react to his music than anything else. Playing in front of three people can be just as interesting as playing in a venue of 1,000 people. It’s like a focus group for behavior. It doesn’t mean he changes his act; it’s just more food for thought in the way he crafts his performance.

The same applies to brand research. Richard Huntingdon, chief strategy officer at Saatchi & Saatchi, said recently that we indulge in too much narcissistic research for brands, only talking with consumers who already know us to find new ways for them to love us. Has political research become the ultimate exercise in narcissism? It’s an expensive way to find out people don’t think much of you, which was the case with the group I listened to, who wasn’t shy about their views of Sunak and Starmer.

Richard argues that talking to real people must be a goal of 2024, and brands need to step out of their comfort zones more. Politicians in the UK do put in a great deal of time campaigning on the street, and they have a good sense of what people, or more specifically their supporters in their constituencies, think. ‘What we hear on the doorstep’ is one of the most overused clichés in the political vernacular. However, the ‘focus group on one’ should not determine public policy.

It’s a balancing act of qualitative and quantitative research to work out whether enough of the public back you.

It’s a global challenge, too.

2024 will be the biggest year ever for elections – close to three billion people will head to the polls across several economies – including India, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, the UK and the United States. The trust we have in institutions matters, and in several of those elections, the nature of democracy itself is at risk.

Indeed, in some countries, oppositions aren’t standing at all. In Bangladesh, Sheik Hasona won the first of the year’s bumper election crop unopposed with a 40% turnout. The opposition claimed that the entire process was corrupt. And I doubt whether there will be much of an opposition in Putin’s Russia.

In the US, Trump will likely win the nomination for the presidential campaign from the Republican Party. He has no policy agenda other than personal grievances, which will deepen the country’s political division, testing the American democratic process to the extreme. We spoke to Karin Robinson from Edelman for an upcoming podcast, and she was more optimistic about the November election for the Democrats.

One thing that US political parties have is an intense amount of data. Democrat Data Exchange handles the Biden campaign database, reportedly containing contact details of 90% of American citizens. It is the latest weapon in the data arms race that the Republicans have been more effective at in recent years.

Because it’s always a two-horse race to win the presidential election, unearthing new or dormant voters is massively important. And in the November, turnout will matter. Trump is not universally liked by all republican voters, many of them claiming they will stay home or vote for Biden to actively prevent him from winning. The Democrats hope their infrastructure will let them be better at reaching those voters in today’s diverse and fragmented media environment.

Back in the UK, what’s important locally often differs from what’s important nationally. It’s why we don’t extrapolate national change trends from single by election results. But one thing remains true: people don’t feel listened to by politicians. According to IPSOS MORI, only politicians (and journalists) are lower than advertising people in maintaining public trust (phew!). For advertisers, like politicians, there’s nothing quite like talking to real people outside their bubble to get a sense of what matters.