Harper’s “death stare”: Elly Alboim and Josh Greenberg comment

Source: Toronto Star
Date: April 14, 2011
Byline: Joanna Smith

Harper’s death stare all about connecting

Stephen Harper was looking at you last night.

The Conservative leader stared straight into the camera – and into your eyes – as he largely ignored his political rivals and spoke directly to voters during both installments of the televised debates.

Call it effective. Call it creepy. Call it a steady gaze. Call it a death stare.

Call it whatever you want, but the man who wants to return as prime minister was clearly coached to stay above the fray as he listed his economic achievements, shrugged off a contempt finding and urged voters to grant him a majority government.

The Conservative national campaign chairman hinted at this strategy before the debates, telling the Star the party viewed the events as an opportunity to address voters directly.

“A debate is not about what one candidate says to another,” said Guy Giorno. “A debate is about what you say to people who are watching.”

That should have been a clue, but while it was expected that Harper would try to avoid any passionate one-on-one sparring, it surprised many observers that the advice to speak directly to Canadians was meant to be taken so literally.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe obviously noticed, and dared Harper to do things differently for the Frenchlanguage debate Wednesday night.

“I hope you will have the decency to look me in the eye when you respond to me,” said a post on the Twitter account for Duceppe ahead of the debate, although Harper did not change a thing.

Josh Greenberg, an associate communications professor at Carleton University, found the technique effective.

“Knowing he’d face three skilled debaters looking to knock him off balance, ‘Angry Steve’ didn’t come out to play -instead, we saw a PM who remained calm and composed, who never got rattled, never broke a sweat and whose tone of voice remained even throughout the debate,” Greenberg wrote in a blog post Wednesday morning, recapping the language debate . “Harper knew precisely where his camera was located and effectively spoke to it, and thus directly to
Canadians watching at home.”

Elly Alboim, an associate professor of journalism at Carleton University and former parliamentary bureau chief for CBC-TV, said establishing eye contact with the audience shows concern, but avoiding eye contact with the others in the conversation can be tricky.
“It’s a delicate balance,” Alboim said. “Looking exclusively at the camera and not at the people you are debating … creates a kind of weird tension between the two potential audiences and what seems to be appropriate behaviour.”

Alboim said Harper probably achieved what he wanted.

“I think it’s effective,” Alboim said. “I think an audience tends not to notice these things on a technical level, but they certainly have a different reaction to someone appearing to speak to the directly and watching two people talk in conversation.”

Communications consultant Barry McLoughlin said he would normally advise clients to begin by addressing the questioner and then turn to the camera, but he thought the camera-only method served Harper well on Wednesday.

“It kept him focused and kept him in the tone of voice that he wanted to adopt – a balanced and a calm tone of voice.”