“Image is everything”. Despite this saying, it is practically impossible to display a flawless image by an individual, corporation or a government. This is because of the varied factors at play in determining which image is on display at any given time.
Public relations, a branch of communication classifies image into five types namely, current, wish, multiple, mirror and corporate. Despite efforts to have a desirable image, the current regime is unable to display an image that rhymes with its manifesto and the aspirations it gave to the many people who voted for it. Image management is an important duty in a situation where expectations are not met due to over promising and eventual under delivering.
Unbeknown to voters, research has shown that we make decisions based on associations and feelings as opposed to facts and statistics. One can make a preference inferior to the competition. This explains why this regime was voted in overwhelmingly. Choice decisions are not only determined by evaluations of rational information but also driven by forces outside rational control.
Current image is determined by intelligence through public opinion poll. Impression held by the public is based on knowledge and experience. Here, the current regime rates poorly, according to the feelings of the majority.
Wish image is the image which a government or an organisation wishes to have, especially new ones. Over time, the government has tried in vain to have an image of a regime that is aptly responsive to the existing and emerging needs of the electorate.
Mirror image is what people in an organisation especially believe to be the impression outsiders have about it. Opinion or image study could reveal a different perceived image. Our leaders have perfected the art of imposing a mirror image despite contrary situation on the ground. Failed or dysfunctional health insurance and education funding model among other ills have eroded the trust and confidence we had in the government.
Multiple image comes when individuals, corporate or other representations create a particular image that does not conform with uniform image. This problem may be overcome by use of uniform vehicle décor, symbols or staff training. Service delivery by a government is the surest and easiest way to avoid multiple images and avoid disillusionment which is made worse by arrogance and impunity.
Corporate image is the overall image. It could be made by a company or government history and reputation since inception. Corporate image is built over time and demands concerted and deliberate efforts to furnish it accordingly. Realistically, the Kenya Kwanza regime has shown little effort to sculptor a favourable corporate image. This can be optimally achieved through good governance, rule of law and economic stability.
Just like in movies and plays theories of realism, evaluation is primarily in terms of how accurately a movie reflects external reality. Realists have shown a persistent hostility towards a plot and neatly structured stories.
The ordinary and the everyday is the main business of cinema. Spectacular events and extraordinary characters should be avoided at all costs. This means that a government should focus on implementation of sound governance structures instead of investing in time to explain itself rhetorically. There should be no barriers between the electorate and the reality in directional virtuosity to deform the integrity of life as it is. It is imperative for a government to build a favourable image drawn out of the way it runs its affairs.
Contextually and analogically speaking, the movie, ‘Bicycle thief’ which was directed by Vittorio De Sica and scripted by Cesare Zavattini in 1948, tries to capture the different images on display. Film making, according to Zavattini, is not a matter of “inventing fables” superimposed over the factual materials of life but of searching to uncover the dramatic implications of these facts. The purpose of cinema is to explore the “dailiness “of events.
‘Bicycle thief’ was acted by non professionals and consists of simple events in the life of a labourer who was an actual factory worker. In the days of its release, nearly a quarter of the workforce in Italy was unemployed. The protagonist, a family man with a wife and two children to support had been out of work for two years. A billboard with job opening sought labourers who must have a bicycle. To get his bike out of hock, he and his wife pawn their sheets and bedding. On his first day on the job, the bicycle is stolen. The rest of the movie deals with his attempt to recover the bike. The man’s search grows more frantic as he crisscrosses the city with his idolising son, Bruno. After a series of false leads, the two finally track down one of the thieves, but the protagonist is outwitted by him and humiliated in front of his son.
Realising that he will lose his livelihood without a bike, the desperate man after sending his son away attempts to steal one himself. The boy observes from a distance as his father peddles frantically to escape a pursuing mob. He is caught and again humiliated in front of a crowd, his son included. With the bitterness of betrayed innocence, the youngster suddenly realises that his dad is not the heroic figure he formerly thought he was but an ordinary man who in desperation yielded to a degrading temptation. The concluding scene shows Bruno walking alongside his father in an anonymous crowd, both of them choking with shame and weeping silently. Bruno’s hand gropes for his father’s as they walk homeward, their only comfort a mutual compassion.
Just like the father could not cut the image of a hero to his son, instead yielding to ridicule and a possibility of losing a job for lack of a bike, our government too cannot convince the citizenry of its desire to betters our lives while embracing the vices that defeat good image and sound governance. In the court of public opinion, negativity abounds as leaders belabour on image management instead of service delivery to awaken the hope of an already disillusioned citizenry.
By Ndichu Kamau