The Semotics of Student Election Posters at the University of Leeds
The University of Leeds annual Leadership Race is fast approaching- only 9 days until voting commences. With the barrage of candidates' posters at the Hidden Cafe and other places around campus, I thought it would be a good idea to take snap shots on my crap low-end smartphone and analyze how the candidates present themselves. The idea for this piece started because of one particularly candidate that caught my eye, Laura Potter who is running for the Welfare Officer position.
Potter has a series of campaign posters of herself and her supporters buck naked holding signs with various cheeky messages, such as "Don't Just Stare. Vote Potter For Welfare."
"Any Problem However Small Welfare Can Support You",
and "POTTER Won't Leave You Hanging".
Another Potter sign implores us to "Let's Lose the Labels" with a woman holding a sign stating, "I Am Worried About Being STEREOTYPED" and Potter holding the sign indicating that she is "INFORMAL APPROACHABLE OPEN".
Another Potter poster with a nude woman (probably Potter herself) holding a sign stating, "WELFARE" over her her butt, with, "POTTER'S got your BACK" underneath.
The pièce de résistance of the Potter series would be this. A nude man holding a sign over Potter's nude body, stating, "I don't know WHERE to go for HELP" with Potter holding a sign right over her crotch, stating, "MORE ACCESS POINTS".
Potter's campaign posters present an array of pleasing eye-candy, attractive individuals who could be mistaken for coming out of an Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. They are all white with what is generally perceived as mainstream acceptable body-shapes. However, the problem with Potter's campaign is its overwhelming reliance on sex to get students to vote for her. The signs do not indicate what her main platforms are or how she will improve welfare for University of Leeds students.
Contrast Potter's "naked" campaign with one of her opponents, Leila Thompson, also running for the Welfare Officer position. Similar to Potter, Thompson also uses a nude theme for her campaign. However, unlike Potter, Thompson actually spells out what her platform is and invites the viewer to access her manifesto via her website and Twitter page. Example:
Meanwhile, another Welfare Officer candidate, Alan Lee Holmes, eschews the use of nudity altogether for giving the student body the basic facts of the various positions he stands for.
However, it isn't just women candidates for the Welfare Officer position that feel the need to sex it up. Equality & Diversity candidate, Emma Friend's campaign slogan is "Friend With Benefits". I suppose one could extrapolate from Friend's campaign that if elected, she'll spread equality & diversity via her cooch since that is what "friend[s] with benefits" generally implies: "A friend in which you are allowed sexual activity but no true relationship is invovled. Not a girlfriend or boyfriend.
The benefit is purely sexual. Not to be tied with feelings." Again, like Potter, Friend does not state in her campaign posters what her manifesto is. It's 100% about sex appeal and cheekiness.
Contrast this with other Equality & Diversity candidates such as Sarah Noble...
Noble and Anam do not rely on sex appeal to get their message across. They state their respective platforms clearly and indicate websites, Facebook, and Twitter pages so that students can access further information.
It is troubling that some female candidates felt the need to sexualize their campaign slogans by either appearing nude (Potter & Thompson) or making a double entendre out of their last name (Friend).
Other candidates relied on pop cultural references to carry their campaign message. Take for instance the Education Officer candidate, Ed McAlone's use of the McDonald's golden arches logo:
Aren't British universities "McDonalized" enough with recent hike in tuition fees to £9,000 along with the massive cuts in higher education! It is bizarre that McAlone felt the McDonald's logo represents him and his campaign best given the erosion that higher education has faced under a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition. Besides, who wants to equate themselves to a chain fast food establishment that sells crap food?
Not to be outdone, another Education Officer candidate, Lois Nuttall, uses Mr. T along with the Snicker's bar logo with a nod to the first 3 letters in her last name, nut, to sell her campaign: "Don't Be A Fool! VOTE NUTTALL FOR EDUCATION" and "GET SOME NUTS".
Again, Mr. T figures prominently in Nuttall's campaign.
I had a bit of a chuckle with Nuttall's campaign slogan because Mr. T holds a special place in my heart. However, aside from the fact that these posters do not state Nuttall's platform, I find it problematic that a white young woman uses a black actor to convey street cred and badassery. Aren't black men stereotyped enough? Meanwhile, there is a woeful lack of BME (black, minority, ethnic) lecturers at British universities not to mention that many BME students are routinely discriminated and marginalized while at university and when trying to enter the workforce.
Sigh...
Afterthought
I posted this link on my Facebook and a friend also shared it on his Facebook wall, which produced a lively discussion among his friends. One commenter wrote this which deeply resonates with me:
"It's the entire lack of substance or thought that bothers me the most. How can you trust someone to act in everyone's best interests, with integrity and sincerity, when they've made the decision (consciously or otherwise) that most of their electorate is too stupid or shallow to care about policy (not that we can assume that she has actual policies) - and would be best manipulated by cheap, vacuous and cliched marketing ploys. It's insulting to every student."
Perhaps the University of Leeds Union should enforce that student election campaign posters stick to the issues at hand and not rely on sex or stereotypical and casually racist themes to get the message across.
