There are those who already compare him and his speeches to Churchill. And if British Churchill had the famous Hoy mark, then Ukrainian President Zlansky has the distinctly green and presidential shirt as a catchy international emblem. He also wears the tight-fitting T-shirt in his speeches to the most respected parliamentarians around the world when the unassuming attire is meant to convey the visual message of a young man and man speaking at eye level from the battlefield in a sense of urgency and urgency.
The green shirt and the emotion bomb
Even the unprofessional videos from the field on social media, in selfie-like speeches are meant to add to the sense of humanity and unmediated touch. This is especially important as a confrontation with all the so-called statesmen detached from the mummified suits and of course with his bitter enemy Putin. Sitting in the Kremlin is cold and alienated and his face is shrouded in stiffness. If Putin radiates coldness and power, Zalansky is trying to evoke warmth and sympathy. The Underdog.
Zalanski’s verbal artillery on the entire virtual tour around the world is built on pathos, that is, on emotion. He is not at all trying to talk about factual and logical issues. It is no coincidence that he does not mention NATO at all. The goal is not to be right but to inspire empathy and this he is known to do as someone who came from the world of television.
Zalansky tried to use the same emotional mechanism on the Israeli pundits, and to be precise, on the Israeli public, which is supposed to put pressure on the government. Not sure he succeeded. The method that worked for him elsewhere in the world here may work against him like a bombardment.
Each in his own language
As a rule the method is known and famous. I teach it already in the first lesson to principals in conveying messages. You need to highlight the similarities between you and your target audience. How do you do that? Speak in terms, examples and cases that the audience knows from their own world and thus create an identification that is the key to persuasion. In fact, in every parliament, the Ukrainian president has used this method to suit the specific audience and country:
In the US Congress he compared Pearl Harbor and the attack on the Twin Towers and quoted Luther King as “I need it”, to the British Parliament he mentioned Churchill and the war on senses, and in front of the Canadian Parliament he spoke about the possibility that Vancouver would be bombed by missiles. The President of Ukraine speaks as it is stated in the Book of Esther: “To the state and the state as it is written and to the people and the people as its language”
But what worked for Zalanski vis-à-vis other countries does not work in Israel. The method of imagination and the use of well-known terms led him to mention Golda Meir, a child of Ukraine, the artist of R. Nachman of Breslav, but also the final solution. And more, but the comparison to the Holocaust is perceived as Israel as a disgrace to the Holocaust. Studies show that comparisons to the Holocaust almost always arouse public resentment in Israel (although everyone on the right and left compares from Begin, through Ben-Gurion to Netanyahu). When the President of Ukraine, despite being a Jew, compares what his people are going through with what the Jewish people are going through, he is wrong. He adds guilt to crime when he makes a historical mistake and presents Ukraine as having helped Jews in the Holocaust while also being responsible for the deaths of many in the Holocaust and the series of riots and pogroms that preceded it.
So perhaps with a superficial understanding of the Israeli public, Zalanski thought that the method of imagination would work for him here as well, but a lack of understanding of the deep feelings of the Israeli audience was going to shake him. He went one step too far. The 2 words “The final solution: constitute a powerful emotion bomb that was thrown into the heart of the Knesset, but the shock waves of this emotion bomb hit Zalansky back.
Speech in 5 steps:
Apart from the mistake, rhetorical and principled, of the comparison to the Holocaust, which can also be argued that for him at least success caused a stir, Zalansky works according to an orderly sub-discipline and applies all the techniques to standing in front of an audience and a camera.
Here are 5 things he did in his speeches and these are things that anyone can do when conveying messages:
- Visualia – In addition to the khaki shirt that conveys a visual message to the US Congress, Zalansky turned his message into images by showing a well-edited and moving video of children hit by Russian bombs. At the end of the video is a short slogan: Close the Ukraine sky now.
- Short messages – Zlansky knows how to sum up. He’s sharp. Up to 2 words: Do more! Indifference kills!
- Emotion – In the Canadian Parliament, Zalansky addressed his Canadian counterpart, Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, as the father to the father, and said to him, “Justin, imagine that you and your children hear such bombs around you … can you imagine that?”.
- Questions – What can not be said directly so as not to anger and provoke antagonism can be said with a question mark. Instead of saying: You are indifferent and abandon it because of interests and cooperation with the new Nazis, Zalansky asks the State of Israel: ‘Why did you not give up weapons? What is? indifference? Calculations? A desire to be objective and not to distinguish between good and evil? ‘ The question-asking method allows him to say what he wants without saying it explicitly. There is another benefit to this. It is no coincidence that we are all familiar with the phrase ‘rhetorical question’. Asking questions that make people think and answer for themselves and is one of the most effective mechanisms in rhetoric and message transmission. It is better to let people come to a conclusion on their own than to tell them what the conclusion is. For ourselves we believe more than for others. Zalanski’s speech, although very short, included quite a few question marks. A question has more power than an answer.
- Body language – Zlansky, a president who, like Ronald Reagan who grew up in Hollywood, knows well from his past as an actor that body language and appearance affect no less, and perhaps much more, than the content of things. He uses all the techniques of playing in front of a camera and does it well. Assault body language, accompanying punch, eye contact, short sentences followed by pauses, decisive tone of voice, voice diversity, with a correct and simple frame. In the face of the cold Putin and the aging Yadin, it is difficult not to identify with the Ukrainian actor who became president under siege.
Zlansky knows that words are a weapon and he manipulates it well. Picture is also artillery, certainly in the age of visibility and social networks. But despite the immense importance of images and words in influencing world public opinion, what will determine the war is precisely the actions, the fighting on the ground and the steps taken by the parties and the countries of the world. Words have power only when they lead to deeds.
Kaveh Shafran is the CEO of a company to perform and influence and trains leaders in Israel and around the world to perform in front of an audience and a camera. Former political writer and author of the book Secrets of Netanyahu.