THE IMAGE OF POLITICS

Image may not be everything for political candidates, but it's sure an important part of the package.

So important that consultants and high-priced agencies advise candidates on virtually their every move.

Gov. Bill Clinton, rumor has it, still has his hair cut in Arkansas so he can avoid the impression that he's spent $40 in a salon.

And President George Bush avoids cerebral comments in his speeches, opting for a more down-to-earth style.

All this concern about image is natural. The political process is after all an exercise in communication, said Thomas Harte, speech professor at Southeast Missouri State University.

Harte said the examination of communication methods used for political messages and their content is something of a classic debate.

"You need to have something worth saying, but you have to be able to communicate that message," he said. "Which part is more important?"

Some people have decried this emphasis on image. Campaigns are not run by the candidates anymore. They are run by a group of media gurus and consultants.

Harte said the concern is that through careful coaching, a candidate could be fashioned in a false image.

Despite the potential for excess, Harte said he's glad to see political speechmaking as an art thrives in campaigns at all levels.

"It's interesting to me how important a true, stand-before-an-audience speech really is," Harte said. "We live in such a high-tech society, it seems like the old fashioned way to get a message out. But it works.

"Clinton is a fairly effective speaker. He seems to me to project a feeling that he is speaking with some conviction. He seems thoughtful and he seems to be direct and spontaneous. He's a fairly dynamic speaker."

Harte added that Clinton has a lot of momentum right now, adding fuel to his speaking fire.

"He is also an outsider trying to get in. That affects how he speaks. Clinton has a little of a preacher in him."

Bush, too, is an effective speaker, but with a very different style, Harte said.

"He has kind of a plain style, more down-to-earth. He is not as grandiose, but he is articulate and seems to know what he's talking about."

Harte said it's naive to think non-verbal clues aren't an important part of political communication.

"Looking good and sounding good is important," Harte said. "Those are the things everyone notices first. People tend to think candidates are less able to fake non-verbal actions, and they read meaning into that body language."

Clothes, too, make the candidate, Harte said.

"It's been interesting to me that the candidates dress so much alike. They've all read the book about dressing for success and are wearing the `power' colors."

Harte said that although presidential debates amount essentially to dual press conference, still are important to the process.

"When Reagan walked to Carter to shake his hand that was not unplanned and it said something about the candidate," he said. "We all know that they go to great lengths so that neither one appears to be taller than the other."

The classic example of the impact of image in a debate was during the Kennedy-Nixon campaign.

"I still think Kennedy was the winner, but image was clearly an important aspect. Kennedy looked good and sounded good. Nixon wasn't feeling well and looked ill at ease."

But there are times, Harte said, when a slightly unpolished appearance can be an advantage or part of the message a candidate tries to convey.

"Paul Tsongas isn't particularly gifted in delivery, but we all tend to read meaning into that," he said. "It suggests he wasn't artificial.

"If you're too good at delivering the message, you seem too slick and not sincere. Ronald Reagan had a way of being endearing in delivery. He projected friendliness and sociability."

But much of Reagan's projected image was carefully planned, Harte said, as with the familiar pauses during speeches when he presumably searched his mind for the right word. "That word was right in front of him on the Teleprompter," he said.

Harte said advertising, particularly through television, has become increasingly crucial to political campaigns. Research shows that more people will see a candidate's single television commercial than the combined total of people who will see him speak live.

But the economics of the television medium tends to debase the political process, Harte said.

"Political ads are paid for, they are short and they reduce the process to the selling of the president," he said.

Although most political ads are issue-oriented, it's almost impossible to "deal with issues in 30 seconds," Harte said.

"But I believe the real trouble is that political advertising can cheapen the process. You have commercials for Revlon lipstick, Bunny bread, Roy Blunt and then deodorant. Are we selling politicians like any other product?"

He said another concern is that electronic media often cover a political campaign like a horse race. "Who's ahead and who's behind. Whatever they are doing is viewed in terms of how it will help the candidate gain a lead," Harte said.

"Of course, that's what makes a good news story. It's much more interesting than a dry, dull tome on what a candidate will do with the economy."

The image of politics also is applicable to local and state campaigns, Harte said.

"If there were a debate between state senate candidates, for example, people would come away with a feeling of what kind of person they think they saw. Was the candidate thoughtful, friendly, gracious, prepared, confident, genuine," Harte said.

"Hopefully they would also come away with some of the content presented by the candidates."