¶ … public by the politician (negative or positive)? An important part of getting the message across in political campaigns is an approach referred in as 'framing' (a psychology terminology). Individuals listen and hear the speech logic, but they do also respond, albeit subliminally, to the manner in which the issues are presented. The motif of one of America's top speechwriters, Frank Luntz's widely acclaimed book on public speaking, 'Words that Work', hits the nail on the head: it is not about what you say, it's about what the people hear. What are the key words that speaker wants the electorate to 'hear' from a speech and from his campaign in general? Saul Alinsky, a far left activist of United States, featured this idea in his infamous work: Rules for Radicals: in which he stated choose your target, freeze it, make it personal and then polarize it (Crawford).

A classic framing approach is the Dead Cat Denial; whereby, one untruthfully accuses their opponent of having a dead cat on the front of their doorstep (or one accuses their opponent of some other unpleasing fact). When the opponent exclaims angrily that this is completely untrue, one slyly replies: Ah you are now denying that you do have a dead cat on the front of your doorstep? (Crawford)

The expected and ensuing angry denials from the opponent create a general message or mood that this opponent is always arguing endlessly about dead cats. After all, if he or she does not have a dead cat on their doorstep or somewhere in their house, then why is he getting so emotional about the matter? The public will think that perhaps this individual is too emotional to be trusted, in this way one will have sown a seed of doubt into the opponent's credibility. Thus, mission accomplished: a sly reputational frame-up (Crawford).

In his 2008 presidential election campaign, Barrack Obama took this approach to a whole new level. He led on the electorate with his 'hope for change' call. He not only sold this dull but positive slogan as some sort of dynamic policy mandate but also sold himself as the epitome of hope and change. If his opponent Senator John McCain had a slogan at all, it was never even recognized by the majority of the electorate. Even worse, by virtue of him, Senator McCain, not being Barrack Obama, he was open to attack and criticism as opposing change and hope, and what can be more damaging to one's election prospects than that? One should be careful and observe what happens if Hillary Clinton gets the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. Any man who dares challenge her ipso facto will be "framed" as a sexist reactionary. In Britain, it is unwise and difficult to turn an election and make it all about a leader's personality. For example, their recent elections had two major rhetorical 'framing' themes: "Steady as she goes!" And "It's time for a change!" These framing themes touch on our attitude to risk. The parties that are not in government can easily press for change and on the other hand, those in government stress on continuity, keeping a straight course and unfinished business. The Scottish independence vote, for example, also turned into a contest of change-versus-continuity (Crawford).

What is the motive for selecting it and why?

Within all the existing types of political systems (be it democratic, oligarchic or autocratic), political leaders and heads of government, by virtue of the positions they hold, play a key roles in both local and international development and politics. These leaders often rely on spoken word to mobilize and influence their followers and convince the electorate of the benefits that could arise from their leadership. Such political speeches are driven by the need to persuade the nation and to familiarize the leaders' socioeconomic plans, policies and actions (Denton and Hahn). It is widely known today that there are many political and socio-economic inequities between the developed nations of the West and the rest of the world. In discourses on global economic relations, much of the focus is often on the success stories in the Western world (e.g. economic growth) in contrast to the socio-economic and

Closely tied to this, is the need for economic integration through globalization forces such as investment, information, and production. As Fafowora (1998: 5) noted globalization is all about breaking down trade barriers and encouraging more integration of the global market. This in effect suggests that, globalization is one of the ways in which to methodically restructure the economic and political relationship between nations by breaking down communication, information, culture, and commerce barriers (Alo).
The election process and its speeches hence become a contest of competing framings. For example, still in the UK, the Labour Party had some success in framing the NHS (National Health Service) as a key election issue despite several NHS disasters happening under their watch e.g. Staffordshire (Crawford). However, in real life no British political party knows what action to take concerning the administration-heavy NHS, which unfortunately is doomed to decline with the advent of new technologies, which will revolutionize the health services in Britain, by developing new way to deliver medical services to people. Rather than offering the electorate a frank explanation of the matter, these parties have retreated to empty rhetoric and senseless statistics (Crawford).

How do the various community and interest groups tackle false promises presented by politicians?

Almost all politicians know and use the idea that the key to winning election contests is to make great promises. These politicians promise to cure societal ills such as government corruption, heavy taxes, and environmental pollution. However, when elected they fail to bring about these vast improvements they promised (Whitbourne).

The level of elected office seems almost positively linked with the size of promises made. Politicians at all levels of government aim to attract more votes by improving improvements in specific problems facing their electorate. There is no need to explain the many broken promises that have been made throughout history. For instance, when President Barrack Obama was interviewed with Jon Stewart about whether the campaign slogan 'audacity' had changed to 'timidity', this proved two points that (a) there is no politician immune to not living up to pre-election pledges and (b) being accused of (a) (Whitbourne).

In many ways, the electorates are often eternal optimists who cannot learn from experience. We often want to believe that politician will change our lives for the better. However, when post election reality hits, we usually forget how unrealistic our expectations were in believing in the election promises and we promise ourselves that the 'next' time the outcome will be different. For example in 2008, when Obama supporters got caught up in 'mass delusions' and expected some sought of miraculous results from Obama and a Democratic majority congress. When the miracles felt to materialize the voters were angry and the Republicans then sought to exploit the situation by promising the electorate that their candidates would fulfill a whole new set of mostly unrealistic promises (Whitbourne). Reasons why people care a lot about broken promises is that they often get a lot more media attention than the ones that have been fulfilled. Another reason is the system of checks and balances in the U.S. whereby the president might try to achieve a milestone but such efforts might end up being stymied by Congress or government bureaucracy (Bernstein).

What are the marketing techniques used to target and brand minority groups?

Don't be an ignorer

Almost all U.S. marketers acknowledge the significance of ethnic segments. However, some believe that ethnic consumers cannot afford what they are offering or are not interested. Others assume that multiethnic marketing is not for them. Usually, these assumptions are informed on stereotypes. Meaning, whether one represents a unique product brand or a luxury brand, it is crucial to understand the relationship between consumers and your brand, since nowadays, ethnic consumers from a significant part of the mainstream market and you need them to stay relevant (Burgos and Brown).

Between Customization and Standardization

Similar to global marketing, brands targeting the multicultural marketplace have to find the proper balance between standardization and customization. Going too far in one direction can mean lost efficiencies. Going too far in the opposite direction can also mean that a brand becomes less relevant to consumers. The fact that multicultural marketing concerns diverse people in the same locale, poses its own unique challenges and opportunities. Even if the multicultural marketplace responds positively to cross-cultural strategies, marketers ought to be careful since what they do for one segment is likely to affect other groups (Burgos and Brown).

Incorporate the Ethnic Perspective

It is usual for brands to design marketing plans based on the needs of the white community, i.e. The general market and then attempt to adapt these plans to the nuances of other ethnic groups. Integrating these ethnic views at the foundational level has been proven time and again to be more efficient and effective. Often a tweak in advertising…