[ad_1]
“That change really indicates that something is wrong. I would just like to point out that not always a communication person is the reason for this error. In the case of the president, there is such specificity that he is a personal institution. There are a few more speakers, but it’s basically one person.
At this point, the fact that something is wrong with the communication, I think, is perhaps the indecision of the president or some incompletely articulated communication goal. What bothers me the most, especially probably in recent years, are the many examples of inconsistencies.
When it’s inconsistent, then you don’t understand what that president is like with us. It’s not that it’s bad, you just don’t know what it is, “said Kęstutis Gečas, a communication expert, on the news program” Akiniųusis Interview “.
For his part, Skirmantas Malinauskas, a former adviser to Prime Minister Saulius Skvernelis and a journalist, believes the president simply lacks political experience, and the desire to change people on the communication team may also be related to the desire to overload relationships. with the media.
“In this case, everything will depend on the tone that continues to speak, on how it will look for the confrontation or certain bridges,” he said.
Lack of political experience?
The presidency announced Thursday that G. Nausėda’s team would leave four people, including the country’s chief spokesman, Antanas Bubnelis, and Foreign Minister Algė Budrytė.
Meanwhile, Raminta Stanaitytė-Česnulienė, former spokesperson for Finance Minister Vilius Šapoka, will lead the Presidency communication. He will replace Ridas Jasiulionis, who previously replaced Aistis Zabarauskas.
“First of all, when three communication managers change in any institution in two years, it is obvious that this is an area that is problematic. Either the people who leave those positions do not agree with the supervisor or the supervisor decides to change those people. In any case, it is clear that these changes are not happening for the first time.
There were really experienced people on the team. Perhaps it is easier to talk about R. Jasiulionis, because we have worked together, but there is also a former adviser to A. Kubilius, a seasoned journalist A. Zabarauskas, who was really an important factor in the success of the president during the campaign.
Also, the man who worked in public relations very professionally was a partner in an agency. (A.Bubnelis, – aut.past.). Now a very experienced man is coming too. This is a question for me, why are people who, as in other areas, have proven to be highly qualified, are changing so much? ”, Said S. Malinauskas.
At the same time, he emphasized that this may have happened because of G. Nausėda’s lack of political experience, as he is “a man who held the highest office without political experience.”
“I think that, on the one hand, he is very inclined to believe in those management rules that remodeling one team will change the results to the other side, because now the results are apparently unsatisfied, perhaps some criticism from the media. We’ll see how the ratings change, but apparently there is a desire to recharge that relationship.
(…) The president is exceptional in the sense that, unlike the Seimas or the Government, the prime minister, who has a huge team, is in many cases a one-man leader. In this case, everything will depend on the tone in which he continues to speak, on how he will look for the confrontation or certain bridges, “added a former adviser to S. Skvernel.
Not sure who our president is?
At the same time, K. Gečas pointed out that it is not yet very clear who our president is, because the leaders of the country who had previously held the post had more pronounced qualities, and G. Nausėda is characterized by inconsistency.
“We had D. Grybauskaitė such a militant president, V. Adamkus an American Westerner, A. Brazauskas was economical, he knew a lot about economics and G. Nausėda wants to be an enforcer, a welfare state, but in daily communication he is not very visible As a result, one day it looks the same, the next it looks different.
That inconsistency knocks out the crayfish. Then there is the question: is it a problem of communication and the inability of the people, lack of will to do it, without knowing how, or is he still the head of the country, “the communication expert asked.
According to him, when drawing his portrait as president, G. Nausėda must “get involved in communicative territories”, that is, be strong, work and speak only on specific topics so that the public knows who the head of the country is and what he cares about. on.
“You don’t have to be very strong everywhere and do everything, just take some aspects, be very strong there so that the public knows how you will be there, what you will say to one side or the other. And now he wants to be, financially speaking, very good to everyone. Leaders cannot be good for everyone, they must be honest. If you are good for everyone, someone will automatically suffer, because there are not enough resources to be good for everyone, ”explained K. Gec.
S. Malinauskas emphasized that the president should also not be afraid of sincerity and not knock on the door if he feels offended. According to him, G. Nausėda must understand that politics will not be good for everyone and there will be situations in which it will be necessary to take responsibility.
“I think the president should not be afraid of sincerity. Even in cases where the last speeches were about priest A. Toliat, the Inquisitions, his wife’s evaluations, etc., he could express that position, but he should not talk about someone closing the door or someone speaking with impunity.
I think the president is beginning to realize that, as they say, politics will not be good for everyone. D.Grybauskaitė was not good for everyone. And you won’t be popular all the time. There will be situations in which it will be necessary to take responsibility ”, advises S. Malinauskas.
They compared the situations of S. Skvernelis and G. Nausėda
S. Malinauskas, a former adviser to S. Skvernelis, saw an advantage in the team-change situation: the people who left her are no longer placed in warm government jobs. He claimed that he realized this even after the end of S. Skvernel’s leadership in government.
“I see an advantage, which nobody talks about, that our political tradition is changing a bit. The same happened with S. Skvernelis, and now with G. Nausėda: the people who help during the electoral campaign, no longer sit somewhere in a soft, official position, they do not become leaders of some institutions.
As for A. Budrytė and A.Bubnelis, they are leaving, they will probably return to the private sector, and in the team of the former prime minister, from what I had to look, there were no such things.
This may be the way Western fashion also comes here, that a politician chooses the people who help him temporarily, and those people are not tied to that politician for the rest of his life until the end of his career, “he summarized S. Malinauskas. until.
Read more about the changes in the president’s team here.
