I have watched two major presidential elections in the past two years—one in my country, Kenya and the United States of America. There were three major similarities and one significant difference. In Kenya, the party with the blue palette lost, while in the U.S., blue won. Isn’t that an observable difference? The race was tight, and in both cases, the candidates backed by the sitting regime lost the election.
My main observation is how the electorate interacted with and responded to campaign messaging.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of communication proposes that every message undergoes persuasion through two different routes: the central route and the peripheral route.
Electorates who strongly support a particular candidate based on the logical analysis of the campaign messaging pay close attention to the candidates’ campaign messages and apply the central route. Persuasion through the central route is direct and thorough. It requires greater involvement from the audience, meaning self-motivation is necessary for the receiver. The communicator must understand the audience, context and state of the recipient. In other words, the receiver cares about both the messenger and the message and, therefore, logical and intellectual messaging is necessary for this category of electorate.
The peripheral route, on the other hand, is weaker, and the receiver’s involvement is low. Here, the receiver is not necessarily interested in either the message or the messenger. They are uncertain about whether to agree or disagree, so persuasion happens through external factors.
This is how electorates likely decide whom to vote for. Central-route voters make decisions based on logical conclusions perhaps based on the manifesto’s presented. They also look at the practicality of the manifestos and the likelihood of the candidate to deliver. The problem with this group is that they have little capacity to objectively consider the
Peripheral-route voters, however, are influenced by factors such as advertisements, campaign strategies, PR stunts, the ability to cry in church, pushing a wheelbarrow, or delivering a simple yet compelling message that feels believable—like making a nation great again.
I won’t dwell too much on the election outcomes, but tariffs and taxes have a similar impact on the electorate’s purchasing power, employment and unemployment, public disbelief, hasty decision-making and flexing of power to change existing systems.
I aimed to demonstrate how the Elaboration Likelihood Model should shape how we think about our audience and refine our communication tactics. A sharp communicator gains an edge over an undecided audience, who are heavily influenced by messaging strategies. Whether you’re in politics, sales, fundraising, therapy, or church, this model is likely to be effective.
The peripheral route requires hard work, yet it often proves more influential in persuasion because of winning the undecided audience who may not be motivated to follow through with your PowerPoint presentation. If you believe in your product or course, you must think through how to persuade the two categories of your audience. It might require you to work harder, sometimes.