Parliamentary Elections in Slovakia in the Context of the Election Campaign

This article presents a brief analysis of forms and contents of political communication, including special features and key topics as well as communication strategies during the election campaign in Slovakia before the parliamentary elections in September 2002. It is asserted that the parties SDKÚ, KSS, ANO, SDL and Smer carried out the most professional campaign (based on various criteria of evaluation discussed in the text). Yet the rest dufferent sharply. The 2002 campaign was in general more professional than the campaign before the 1998 parliamentary elections. The most expensive, longest and most visible campaigns were organized by Smer, SDKÚ and ANO. On the one hand, comparison of costs and profits as well as gain of voters in percents in comparison to the beginning of 2002 suggests that the campaign of the KSS was the most efficient one. On th eother hand, overall gain of voters in real (total) numbers suggests that the campaign of the SDKÚ was the most successful. Political personalities and TV discussions played a key role in the campaign. However, these discussions of politicians were in fact no discussions at all but rather answers to questions and self- or party-presentations. Information from television broadcasts was considered to be the most important source of information for the majority of citizens. Private electronicmedia were not allowed to broadcast party electoral propaganda. Meetings with supporters or curious citizens had a form mostly of entertainment. The campaign was mostly filled with soft rhetoric, with the exception of Smer and the SNS and P SNS. Besides political manipulation by TV Markíza in favour of ANO, there were dozens of related activities of NGOs. The latter activities were often controversial and eventually with little likely effect. Billboards seem to be very important and relatively cheap tools for political marketing (ANO, SDKÚ, Smer). Meetings with citizens (KDH) as well as regional party structures may play an important role (KSS). Widespread visual presence of message does not guarantee success (SNS). From the point of content of messages, direct, clear and concrete rhetoric is the best. Yet this kind of rhetoric is not good enough for success in itself (HZD, SDL, SNS and P SNS) The research has confirmed that covert propaganda is more efficient than overt propaganda, but overall performance in the previous electoral period is more important than various threats or promises (SNS, P SNS and SDL). Criticism (case of SDKÚ) or ignorance in news (case od KSS) are not key criteria for some voters. However, negative information of fuzzy formulations can deter some voters from taking part in elections (former HZDS voters) or from supporting a party (as was case of Smer). The campaign is important mainly for keeping stable support of the electorate. The most important thing is not to make strategical or tactical mistakes. The key to success or failure seems to be the macrocontext ofelations. Political marketing was born or perhaps even firmly etabilished in Slovakia with the 2002 campaign.