At Google Zeitgeist, UK Government Fails the “Get It” Test: Mandelson Harkens Back To When Govt Media Relations Was About Speaking, Not Listening

Ok, caveats.

> There is no doubt in my mind – if only because their global impact was greater, that the George W Bush administration was worse than this Brown Labour government. In many ways, more competent, but guiding their nation in dangerous directions and out of touch. But, at last, they are gone.
> I am not yet able to vote in the UK and while in the US I have always been of the Democrat persuasion – and further have sympathy for the principles of New Labour

However, watching this Labour government is, as the phrase goes, ‘car crash TV.’ One reason manifested itself today here at Google’s legendary Zeitgeist – the retreat of the good and the great in technology plus a dash of TED-esque thought leadership.

Lord Mandelson, the much-lauded New Labour spin doctor, put on a brave face by coming in to such a large and influential audience in the eye of the MP expense storm and in fact handled it well. He used charm and even addressed some points on that topical item without being prompted.

His primary speech also underscored a lot of pro-free trade commentary and pro-competition beliefs that make the UK’s left stand out in Europe and will be the underpinnings of why the UK will come out of this crisis ahead of the Old World of the continent, whenever that should be. I am convinced that the British propensity to openness to competition and migration will serve it well in these years (says the Yank).

However, one telling answer to a question showed why this Labour has struggled to understand what people of the the UK think – note that this is the most advanced nation in the takeup of online media in the world. He was asked what he thinks of the digitisation of media by Nancy Cruickshank, the Exec Director charged with digital development at the Telegraph (currently the UK’s leading online newspaper w/ 26M uniques) .

He harkened back to the ‘good old days’ of media when they only had to get one-ish press release out a day to drive the media cycle. He admitted that it was pointless to wish away this new world where millions are part of the media and the message, not just a handful of state-owned TV stations and a few newspapers. But he clearly was wistful and he indicated that it was ‘getting in the way of him doing his job.’

Run that by me again? The fact that he can, without pricey pollsters and biased, variably-talented civil servants, have free access to both what people think and maybe, just maybe, even leverage ideas that did not come from within the hallowed sanctum of Whitehall doesn’t seem to be a possible advantage? The potential to generate not just a controlled message, but get feedback and improve couldn’t be an opportunity?

That is precisely why Brown-Darling-Mandelson have been blind to see the receptiveness of last-minute, secret decisions like the 10pct tax shift and more. They make decisions in a vacuum. And consider the public – their masters – as people to be kept at arms length and at bay. Just like any country, just – dare I say it – like Obama, one does not expect a government to react hourly, minutely, to every comment by every citizen. And I am a big believer in the concept that popularity does not necessarily equal good policy (I think Bill Clinton got away with a lot due to some bouyant times). Elected representatives have an obligation do make hard decisions that may not be popular sometimes. But they should not be blind to obvious sentiment.

Ironically, Dieter Zetsche, CEO of Daimler, on what he dubbed the ‘dinosaur panel,’ was refreshingly in tune with the idea of listening to to users for product design and even leveraging the opensource community for technology development.

I do wish I felt that the Etonian clubbies in the Conservative party were more of the ilk of the down-to-earth, Blackberry-wielding man in the White House, but even so, I’m amonst those who are ready for change.