A doctor in political science says that the center’s politicians have a lot to learn from the “BBB” Octavio Geddes Blog

Curiosity increased when Articles Receive digital popularity surveys from BBB members, sent by Professor Philip Nunes, Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA).

Specialist in political communication and director of Quaest Consultoria e Pesquisa, Felipe pursues politics through the pop dimension of its actors, and the popularity of politicians in the virtual world. Hence the definition of “pop politics”. Felipe: Politicians, especially those in the middle, have a lot to learn from BBB.

Read the interview below:

What is the common denominator between Big Brother and the current politics, which you know as Pop?

In pop politics and BBB, the position in the controversies is a decisive one. And as the audience decides, whoever stands or acts according to the prevailing tendencies of the audience wins. No wonder, I think it is more difficult to disagree over “BBB” than the election. In the “BBB” the flight is blind. In campaigns, politicians can access the research.

One of the lessons politics should learn from BBB is that the secret to success in the pop era is the ability to attract and build attention. As an entertainment product, BBB needs to engage and fix the audience for a hundred days of continuous crowd.

Few things generate more than controversy. Differences are fundamental to nurturing attention and interest in consumption. It is not without reason that the program has a specific day to stir friction between the trapped.

Controversial politicians are those who gain digital popularity in the indexes Quaest counts. They are the ones who catch our attention, who we stop watching. For the same reason Juliet and Jill are BBB champions this season: They love to mess!

What are the other lessons?

BBB has managed to transform itself into a microcosm of major issues of public debate.

Basic civic issues of the day, like race and gender, end up in the entertainment sphere. After all, they spark controversy, controversy generates audiences, likes, comments, and reports, and all of that direct and indirect audiences are profitable. This is the entertainment industry.

BBB teaches politics that interest and audiences come with entertainment, which in turn is fueled by controversies, debates and debates. Basically, we can say that the two are wonderful phenomena: they generate results (financial or political) through entertainment.

What does it take to be a hero in “Big Brother” and in pop politics?

There is no magic formula. There is luck, there is a strategy. But we can believe that attitude and reaction to the disagreements based on this is an essential component of success. Knowing how to strategically choose the situations that attract the audience the most is a difference.

In “BBB,” Caio saved himself from early exclusion when he knew how to position himself correctly, that is, do what was expected in a situation like this, after hearing a seal from Lumena on an important sex issue. Unlike Rodolfo, who chose the wrong (or unexpected) position when he attached Joao’s hair to the brutal wig he was wearing.

In controversy, the chance of consensus is slim. Controversy is a division, it is a rupture, it is a polarization. In this environment, there are two things that don’t help: indifference and the desire to please both.

From what you are saying .. Is there no longer a place in politics for a moderate or central position?

There may be moderation, yes, but it has to be part of the strategy.

I usually say the center and the equinox should be two radical centers of interest. Finding this position is basically a matter of timing. It is essential to know when and to what extent you get into a conflict, in order to be able to demonstrate “irrationality” to the other two.

Moderation and extremism are not wrong or wrong in themselves. You have to be pragmatic and smart. There are times when it is only right to have a fixed position. Sometimes combat wear is a good thing. Other times, it’s best to show that both sides are wrong.

Isn’t it worth sitting on the fence?

Juliet in “BBB” is apparent precisely because she never stops facing her fights, nor fails to have a position in fighting others. She does this even if it is to make someone angry. In fact, there is a key feature of today’s politics: the ability to risk your skin in disagreements that could damage your image.

This is an adjective synonymous with authenticity, or the opposite of lying. I do not think that we are in a context in which the traditional position “I am neither for nor against, but quite the opposite is seen.”

In our time, the logic of positioning itself in the face of the differences that arise prevails. It is this combination that generates the most engagement.

Within this pop-policy logic or BBB, what is the difference between Lula and Bolsonaro for center candidates?

The difference in the characteristics of his followers. explain. “Fan” is an abbreviation of the word “fanatic.” He is not just an enthusiast, but an ardent, dogmatic one. In the extreme, a blind lover, without cash ability.

A fan is also an indispensable piece of the pop world, it is the fan that defends, spreads and spreads the message of the subject of his devotion. We see this in the era of pop politics. Politicians became pop stars. They don’t just have voters, but fans. We see this with Bolsonaro and Lula.

A large portion of the electorate both serve as members of the fan club. They defend everything they say, divulge, and spread, not always with a critical eye, but as unquestionable facts.

We see something similar to the “Big Brother” phenomenon, although the emotions it evokes are generally much less specific to the national scenario. In addition to Bolsonaro and Lula, Ciro has the potential to be a pop star. It contains several essential features to maintain a fan club. Your challenge is that the fan club is multiple.

And the center’s candidates?

Candidates for the center have so far not been able to count on such intense commitment. They do not have a legion of people willing to defend them, as fans, or to attack them, as haters. Take Doria, for example. Lots of people know him, like him, learning about his vaccine struggle, but he doesn’t have a fan club.

In my opinion, Doria doesn’t have this fan club because everything he does appears to be very shared, planned and planned. In pop politics, this is synonymous with unoriginal or self-serving. Not affixed!