Well, what a year 2016 has been hasn't it?
With a new President-elect Donald Trump officially starting in 2017, how did he get in? There's tons of analysis in relation to society being frustrated with the political status quo and that the disenfranchised got behind the Donald (let alone alleged racism and misogyny), but let's look specifically at how the Donald and his political extreme opposite, Bernie Sanders, managed to drive a more passionate following than Hilary Clinton in the early campaign.
Both Sanders and Trump managed to maximise engagement with the right balance of content, language and energy.
Whilst both had almost polar opposite content, each of their respective platforms contained topics which spoke to the core essence of the disenfranchised - where the status quo was no longer viable and that things had to change. Conversely, the content which Hilary ran with was more of the same with improvements upon the Obama administration.
Choose your content well, and you'll get your audience's initial interest.
The language used by each of the candidates were debatably inflammatory, empowering and logical. Can you guess which candidate used which language? Just in the first debates alone, words* like "revolution", "sustainable" tuition-free", and "greed" were used by Sanders. The Donald used words like "great", "tremendous", "nasty" and "hell". Clinton used "systemic", "contentious", "Libyans" and "discrimination". Which of the words would be recognised and emphatically rallied by the majority of voters?
Use the language which speaks WITH your audience, not speaks AT your intended audience.
What about the energy of the respective candidates during their run? If you've watched the campaigns and at least watched the news, you'll see that both Sanders and Trump gave impassioned speeches with changes in energy throughout their speeches and interviews. The change in energy takes the audience on a ride similar to, say, sitting on a rollercoaster or watching a sporting match: it's more exciting due to the up and downs and shift in anticipation and rejoice. The shifting energies enliven their audience, which is seen to be different to Clinton's logical and methodical approach which tends to not latch in to the audience's emotions.
Change the energy of your speech/presentation to take your audience on a journey with you.
So what do you think? Do you think these observations are accurate, or do you disagree? I'll be interested to read your comments either for or against.
Yes. And. Now. - Ivan Chew.
If you want to catch up in person and chat more, I'll be presenting at the Momentum Warrior's December catchup on 14/12/16 on the topic on engagement and audience. To find out more details click on the below image.