Sergey Kadinsky
Written Works
The Rise of Segolene Royal
This essay, the second of the series includes the political theory writings of Todd Gitlin, Kim Fridkin Kahn, and John Thompson as a frames in describing Royal's political campaigns and her relationship with the French press.
Segolene Royal’s
Political Campaigns
In her rise towards becoming the French Socialist party’s presidential candidate for the 2007 elections, Segolene Royal has often had disagreements with the leading members of her party, thus highlighting the divisions and ambitious personalities within the party leadership. From her political rise to this day, Royal also has a difficult relationship with the French media, which reports on the party divisions, gaffes, and personal life of Royal. Some of the details in both of these relationships could help explain her promising rise to party leadership, followed by her decline in the polls as France approaches the presidential elections in April 2007.
Prior to becoming the primary candidate, Royal served as a junior minister in the Environment, Education, and Families Affairs ministries. At the time, she was seen as a younger face of the party, willing to take on controversial positions without compromising. As Deputy Heath Minister, in 1999, Royal proposed that morning-after pills be made available to teenage girls attending public schools. “I want to respond to this distress… by asking adolescents to go through a school nurse, should they fear an unwanted pregnancy,” Ms. Royal announced. (Nichonghaile) Supporters of the decision argued that the pill was a safer option to having an abortion and that many young pregnant women may be reluctant to ask for the pill at drug stores.
Another issue on which Royal has been outspoken is gay marriage. Considering homosexual unions to be part of the definition of family, Royal has gradually extended various partnership benefits and adoption rights to gay couples, culminating with civil partnership recognition in 1999. (Clej) On the position of marriage recognition for homosexuals, she has stood out not only from among the other leading 2007 candidates, but also from her partner, Party Secretary François Hollande. (Thornhill, 2/13/2006)
The fragmentation within the ranks of left-of-center voters resulted in an embarrassing third-place defeat for the Socialists in the 2002 elections. As the “lesser evil” alternative to the second-place nationalist candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen, the Socialists reluctantly voted in the runoff elections for the center-right Jacques Chirac, giving him a landslide reelection victory. (McMillan) Following the election, Royal took on the media by urging it to stop publishing announcements made by the right-wing government ministers without giving equal time for opposition voices to respond. Royal accused Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin’s government of depriving voters of an open debate of views. In response, the governing party claimed that Royal’s proposal “smacked of censorship.” (Agence France-Presse 6/04/2002) The socialists considered announcements made by government ministers as “right-wing grandstanding” and “flashy announcements.” At the time, Royal urged the media to “Refuse to play their game,” claiming that it would be impossible to have balanced political coverage without an open debate. Royal was defeated in her call for balance in covering political announcements, with the accusation that she called for censorship winning the day.
Royal’s criticism of the media for not giving enough coverage to the Socialists failed to dent the charisma of the Hollande-Royal partnership. In a surprise victory, Royal defeated Rafarrin’s candidate, Elisabeth Morin, for the presidency of the Poitou-Charentes region in 2002. With a socialist victory in Raffarin’s backyard, the media recognized Royal’s leadership potential, describing the partnership as a “fairytale couple,” and the symbol of a “revived, younger Left.”
In a party that has been fractured, the media found its spokesperson in Royal. As a newsworthy individual, Royal became a staple of talk shows, gossip columns, big book contracts and the rest. (Gitlin, 148) Taking her cue, Royal appeared publicly with her children on television, as the first sitting minister to give birth in office. The image of a pregnant minister is a novelty for the press, making it newsworthy, giving Royal more exposure in the press. By focusing Royal’s role as a mother, the press was following its traditional portrayal of female leaders as compassionate. (Kahn, 155)
Among the media’s qualifications for spokespeople is the search for the “dramatically personal.” (Gitlin, 149) Royal’s background of an upbringing in a strict conservative home, and rebellion against her father became well known. In her 1996 book, Truth of a Woman, Royal describes the history of women as one of “suffering, heartbreak, pain, humiliation, and murder.” She sounds a positive note on this background by pointing out, “This is why one can have the boldness to believe that women (if they accede to power) can help ensure this brutality recedes.” (Thornhill, 10/21/2006)
Seemingly borrowing Max Weber’s definition of charisma, the 2002 victory was described as a “divine surprise.” (Bremner) The humiliation dealt to a sitting prime minister meant that the regional election was seen as a verdict on national policies. (Henley)
At that point, Royal’s stature began to eclipse that of her partner, making the older party leaders nervous, fearing that she would be the likely presidential candidate instead of one of them. Some of her critics within the party have charged Royal with putting personal ambition above party loyalty. Lawyer Jean-Pierre Mignard, a close family friend and godfather to two of Royal’s children disagrees. “She is not the candidate of the top of the party but its depths. That is a very astonishing situation,” he said. (Thornhill 10/21/2006) An example of this is her “Desires for the Future” campaign, an experiment in “participatory democracy” where ordinary citizens can submit their ideas on how to run the country to 470 local committees and a website. Royal promised to publish the best ideas, harnessing the “collective” intelligence” of the country. Capitalizing on her growing popularity, Royal secured victory in the October 2006 primary elections as the 2007 presidential candidate of the Socialist Party.
Looking for a reason not to support Royal, the “elephants” of the party cite foreign affairs as her biggest weakness. Among the gaffes include her visit to Lebanon, where she met parliament member Ali Amar of Hezbollah. During the meeting, she failed to criticize his description of Israeli policies as “Nazism.” She also expressed support for Amar’s views towards the United States. (Litchfield) In her visit to Canada, her outspoken support for the independence movement in Quebec has brought criticism from Canada’s ruling Conservative and opposition Liberal Party figures.
In contrast, center-right candidate Nicolas Sarkozy is considered knowledgeable and strong in foreign affairs, vowing to defend Israel, contain Iranian nuclear ambitions, and not interfere in Canada’s internal debates. In her analysis of press coverage of women candidates, political writer Kim Fridkin Kahn writes that sex stereotyping is common, as journalists tend to question the viability of women candidates more often than of their male counterparts. As a result, the discussion of a candidate’s viability may be more extensive and negative. (Kahn, 158) Adding to the coverage of her foreign policy gaffes are negative comments from female supporters of her opponents, including Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie (an ally of Sarkozy), who expressed dismay at Royal’s “lack of seriousness” in international affairs. (Agence France-Presse 1/23/2007)
With the election approaching and Royal’s poll numbers declining, some Socialists began to express fear of a repeat of 2002, and openly questioned Royal’s candidacy. Clearly, they feared that Royal might be playing into the media’s inevitable nature of “pointing to one man to exemplify or personify an entire movement.” (Gitlin, 151) In contrast to Royal’s attempts at creating a participatory democracy and a mass movement, the media spent more time covering disputes among party leaders, finding it exciting and more newsworthy.
Emerging as an alternative is François Bayrou, who promises to be an “extreme centrist,” attracting left-wing voters who would vote for the candidate who has the better chance of defeating Sarkozy in the runoff elections. With a sizable number of undecided voters expressing displeasure at partisan divisions, Bayrou has emerged as their voice. Newspapers that gave most of their attention to the ideological opposites Sarkozy and Royal began to give more coverage to Bayrou. Comparing himself to Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, Bayrou did not shy away from attacking his two leading opponents. “Sarkozy sits down with millionaires, while I sit down with farmers,” Bayrou said. In regards to Royal, Bayrou bluntly noted, “The Socialist model doesn’t work.” (Sciolino)
In response, Royal has ordered her campaign workers not to discuss the polls in public, putting on a brave face and desisting from “soul searching.” At the same time, Royal has also declared war against the “elephants” of the party. “Because of the internal debate, the leaders of the Socialist party didn’t rally sufficiently around me at the beginning of this campaign,” she said. In addition, Royal also blamed media bias and misleading opinion polls for her declining popularity. (The Irish Times)
For Royal to successfully combat party divisions without appearing as the only face of the Socialist party, she may need to follow the “lightning rod theory” used by Michael Deaver and David Gergen, who managed public relations for U.S. president Ronald Reagan. Describing Reagan’s predecessor, Gergen put it “One of the most destructive aspects of the Carter administration is that they continually let him go out there and be the point man, on everything! Our strategy has to do with not having the President out answering questions every day.” (Thompson, 139) With this advice in mind, it would be prudent for Royal to accept some of the aloofness that has traditionally characterized French political leaders, and avoid speaking on topics in which she is inexperienced. With qualified advisors and carefully chosen interview topics, Segolene Royal and the Socialist Party may have a fighting chance.
Sources