KUŞAK FARKLILIKLARININ POLİTİK PAZARLAMA VE SİYASAL İLETİŞİM AÇISINDAN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Politik pazarlama ve siyasal iletişim, tüm seçmenleri ve partileri etkilemekte, aynı zamanda bir partinin veya adayın başarılı olması konusunda çok önemli bir görev üstlenmektedir. Siyasi partilerin ve siyasi adayların politik iletişim davranışları ve iletişim için kullandıkları yöntemler seçmenlerin partiye yönelik algılarını, davranışlarını ve tercihlerini etkilemektedir. Seçmenler, siyasi partilerin görüşlerini, politikalarını, liderlerini ve yöneticilerini öncelikle bu algılardan yola çıkarak değerlendirmektedir. Siyasal iletişimin etki gücü bir toplumun kültürel, ekonomik ve teknolojik gelişmişliği ile doğrudan ilgilidir. Kültürel, ekonomik ve teknolojik gelişmesini tamamlamış ülkelerin güçlü kitle iletişim araçlarına sahip oldukları bilinmektedir. Siyasal sistem içerisinde kitle iletişim araçlarını etkin kullanan siyasi parti veya adaylar bu yolla oy verme davranışını etkileyebilmektedirler. Siyasal sistem içerisinde oy verme davranışını etkileyen çok sayıda faktör olmasına rağmen, bireyin oy verme ve siyasi davranışını en fazla etkileyen, oy kullanan kişinin yaş ve yaş grubunun bulunduğu kuşak türünün özellikleridir. Kuşaklar arasında var olan tutum farklılıklarının siyasal davranışlara da doğal olarak yansıdığını ve özellikle oy verme davranışında etkili olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. Bu çalışmanın amacı; kuşak farklılıklarının politik pazarlama ve siyasal iletişim sürecindeki yeri ve önemi hakkında bilgiler vermek, siyasi süreç içerisinde yer alan kuşaklar arasındaki politik algı farkını saptamak ve bu algı üzerinden siyasal iletişim tarzını belirlemektir. Çalışmada ayrıca, kuşak kavramı ve kuşak türleri irdelenerek, kuşaklara yönelik uygulanması gereken siyasal iletişim yöntemleri hakkında önerilerde bulunulmuştur

ASSESMENT OF GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN TERMS OF POLITICAL MARKETING AND POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

Political marketing and political communication affect all voters and political parties, and at the same time they take on a crucial task in the success of a political party or candidate. Political communication behaviors and methods used by political parties and political candidates influence voter perceptions, behaviors and preferences. Voters evaluate the views, politicies, leaders and managers of political parties, primarily from these perceptions. The influence of political communication is directly related to the cultural, economic and technological development of a society. Countries that have completed their cultural, economic and technological development are known to have powerful mass media. Political parties or candidates who effectively use mass media in the political system can influence voting behavior in this way.Although there are a number of factors affecting voting behaviors within the political system, the most influential factor in voting and political behavior of the individual is; the age and the features of the age groups. We can claim that the differences in attitudes that exist between generations are naturally reflected in political behaviors and are especially effective in voting behavior. The purpose of this study is to give information about the place and importance of generation differences in the political marketing and political communication process, to identify the political perception among the generations in the political process and to determine the political communication style through this perception. In the study, the concept of generation and generation types were examined and suggestions were made about the methods of political communication that should be applied to generations Understanding how generations determine their political choices, how they shape them and being aware of factors that affect their choices is important within the context of political marketing. As a result of changes and developments in every aspect of social life, it is becoming more difficult process to have position in individuals’ mind those called as customer in trade marketing and called as voter in political marketing. For that reason, in order to either become a party or a candidate that chosen by voters or creating voters’ loyalty political communication is necessary. Usually, creating a positive image in voters’ mind and being in communication with them gets more important than putting up a knowledgeable candidate, preparing a planned party program or positioning political distribution members in the right place at the right time. In political marketing, perceive voters as a target groups, being aware of these voters’ cultural backgrounds as individuals, knowing about their social and communal groups and which generation they are have importance. Generations have common characteristics, they have also significant distinct behaviors. Voters in a particular generation may choose a party while other voters in another generation may choose another one. Political choices and behaviors of voters may depend on their generations and it can occur under complex effects. There is no consensus among authors about which years will be covered by a generation. In Turkey classification of generation is as followed; between is 1925-1945 Silent Generation, between 1946-1964 is Baby Boomers, between 1965-1979 is X Generation, between is 1980- 1999 is Y Generation and 2000 and later is Z Generation. Each of this generations defined according to the time and place they have lived, their characteristics, lifestyles and behaviors’. Silent Generation that called as War Generation is the generation that consist of individuals that born between 1925-1945 years. This generation while manage their communication processes officially, inscriptive and as adhesive to chain of command, they think that their leader should be authoritative, commander and controller and a person who is aware of his/her responsibilities (Crumpacker ve Crumpacker J. M., 2007: 355). In the process of political communication, to create awareness and sympathy in Silent Generation, some traditional values like; discipline, working hard, obedience to authority, commitment, responsibility, victory celebration and financial and social conservatism should be emphasized (Williams ve Page, 2011). People who born in between the years 1946-1964 are called as Baby Boomers Generation. These individuals also called as the Children of Cold War Period. Baby boomers are workaholics that defined themselves with their careers in terms of their characteristics, lifestyles and attitudes (Williams ve Page, 2011). They use internet even a little, which is one of mass communication tool. Although it is possible to reach this generation via social media, create face-to-face relations and develop methods for this will take one step forward to political parties and candidates. X generation, also called the lost generation, is seen as a generation those who see themselves as opposed to collective, make harsh political outings, have unprecedented clothing styles, more harsh music styles, and different forms of life such as punk. According to Coupland (1989: 83), these people want to have a respectable status and try to explain their existence with money and high-rate socialization. Get out the vote (GOTV) – a technique used by political parties in order to increase turnout at elections is a face-to-face relation. When looking at the degree to which the X Generation attaches importance to face-to-face relations, the use of this method will leave a positive impression on the voters of this zone. Y generation is a generation that has come to the world at a time when there are better conditions in Turkey and in the world. Y generation is different from previous generations with the tendency to flexibility, freedom and individual decision-making and features such as pretentious, quick thinking, goal-oriented, fond of freedom, tech enthusiasts, loving to challenge authority, impatient, questioning, less focused on doing good work, self - loving, trusting, valued, individual attitude high performance, want to do their own business, have a high expectation in business life, like to take responsibility for, aims to work faster and more efficiently than colleagues, open to learning continuously, adaptation skills are high, sensitive to your friends' recommendations and sharing, living life online, followed social media via blogs and online dictionaries before shopping, actively using online shopping, loving to share their lives on social media channels, virtual. During the campaign or pre-election periods, political parties and candidates who are able to use the internet effectively can transmit election notices and promises via web pages. The bi-directional communication process that develops and forms over the Internet has directly contributed to the work of virtual propaganda conducted by parties and maximizes the influence of communication between parties and target groups (Göksel ve Bitirim, 2007: 353-354). The first members of the Z Generation who are believed that they were or will born between 2000 and 2020 will have entered the working life in the next 5 years (Toruntay, 2011: 81). These generation individuals will be leaders and leaders of the future. Reality is a fundamental value of this generation. Even if they are growing up in the midst of a moral collapse, this generation has an understanding of right and wrong (Altuntuğ 2012: 200). It is stated that Z Generation has certain characteristics technologically addicted, hasty, judge on the internet, creative, has multiple attention and multiple decision-making skills, wants everything quickly and consumes instantly. At the conclusion of these features, it is foreseen that they will significantly change the political communication process used for all other generations and that the future will shape the voter profile. Considering the requests of this group to take place in the political process in the coming period, we will be able to see the awareness of political parties and candidates who have prepared political marketing communication methods in this direction. Engaging in political behavior towards the expectations of generations, it will enable political candidates and parties to take advantage of political rivalries. While carrying out their activities in political marketing and political communication process, the approach of knowing that each generation has different characteristics and what are the positive or negative sides of each other, political parties and candidates will affect the political behavior and political participation of voters with different generation characteristics.

___

  • Acılıoğlu, İ. (2015). İş’te Y Kuşağı. Ankara: Elma Yayınevi.
  • Adıgüzel, O. Batur, H. Z. ve Ekşili, N. ( 2014). Kuşakların Değişen Yüzü Ve Y Kuşağı İle Ortaya Çıkan Yeni Çalışma Tarzı: Mobil Yakalılar. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19, 165-182.
  • Altundağ, N. (2012). Kuşaktan Kuşağa Tüketim Olgusu ve Geleceğin Tüketici Profili. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(4), 203-212.
  • Arslan, A. (2007). Yerel Seçim Sonuçları Temelinde Türkiye’nin Siyasi Yapısı. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(1), 1‐32.
  • Arsu, Ş. (2014). Y kuşağını işe alma ve işte tutma stratejileri: Gaziantep ilinde bir araştırma (Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Aksaray Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Aksaray). file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/376683.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
  • Aydın, K. ve Özbek, V. (2004 ). Ailenin Seçmen Davranışları Üzerine Etkisi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2, 144-167.
  • Ayhün, S. E. (2013). Kuşaklar Arasındaki Farklılıklar ve Örgütsel Yansımaları. Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi,2(1), 93-112.
  • Aziz, A. (2017). Siyasal İletişim. Nobel: İstanbul.
  • Balcı, Ş. (2003). Politik Kampanyalarda İmaj Yönetimi: Genç Parti Örneği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9, 143-162.
  • Bayhan, V. (2014). Milenyum veya (Y) Kuşağı Gençliğinin Sosyolojik Bağlamı. Gençlik Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(3), 8-25.
  • Carol, G. J. (1982). Sudents Jenerations and Value Change. Journal of Counseling and Development, 60(8), 500-503.
  • Coupland, D. (1989). The Young and Restless Work Force Following the BabyBoom: Generation X. 3 Ağustos 2017 tarihinde http://joeclark.org/dossiers/GenerationX.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Crumpacker, M. &Crumpacker, J. M. (2007). Succession Planning and Generational Stereotypes: Should HR Consider Age-Based Values and Attitudes a Relevant Factor or a Passing Fad. Public Personnel Management, 36(4), 349-369.
  • Çetin, C. ve Karalar, S. (2016). X, Y ve Z Kuşağı Öğrencilerinin Çok Yönlü ve Sınırsız Kariyer Algıları Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi,14(28), 157-197.
  • Demirkaya, H., Akdemir, A., Karaman, E. ve Atan, Ö. (2015). Kuşakların Yönetim Politikası Beklentilerinin Araştırılması. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 186-204.
  • Dereli, B. ve Toruntay, H. (2015) Örgütlerde Kuşakların İş Değerleri, Motivasyon Ve Mentorluk Kavramlarına Dayalı Yönetimi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Dış Ticaret Enstitüsü Workıng Paper Serıes, WPS No.3.
  • Dominique, W. (1991). Medya Siyasal İletişimin Zayıf Halkası.Birikim, 30, 51-58. Fidan, Z. (2016). Teknoloji ve Siyasal İletişim. Literatürk: Konya.
  • Göksel, A. B. Ve Bitirim, S. (2007). Akp ve Chp’nin Seçim Bildirgelerinin İnternet Ortamında Temsili: Sanal Propaganda. Medya ve Siyaset Uluslararası Sempozyumu, Cilt 1, Ege Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi, İzmir,353-363.
  • Göktaş, P. ve Çarıkçı, İ. H. (2015). Kuşakların siyasal iletişim kültür ve liderlik açısından değerlendirilmesi. MAKÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2 (3), 7-33. http://www.capital.com.tr/ceolar-ne-okuyor/yasam-egrisihaberdetay-6045?page=4 (Erişim Tarihi:08.09.2017). http://www.tdk.gov.tr/index.php?option=com_gts&arama=gts&guid=TDK.GTS.5a2942e8254f26.8 5724775(Erişim Tarihi: 06.07.2017).
  • Guardo, C. J. (1982). Student Generations and Value Change. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60(8), 451-512.
  • İslamoğlu, A. H. (2002).Siyaset Pazarlaması Toplam Kalite Yaklaşımı.İstanbul: Beta.
  • İşçimen, D. S. (2012). Y Kuşağı Çalışanlarının İş Yaşamından Beklentilerinin Karşılanma Düzeyi İle Kurumsal Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişki ve Bir Örnek Uygulama (Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul). file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/323318.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
  • Kalaycıoğlu, E. (1983). Karşılaştırmalı Siyasal Katılma Siyasal Eylemin Kökenleri Üzerine Bir İnceleme. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Kalender, A. (2007). Siyasal İletişim Tekniği Olarak Canvassing ve Seçmen Davranışı Üzerindeki Etkileri, Selçuk İletişim Dergisi, 5(1), 144-155.
  • Karadoğan, E. (2004). Seçmenin Siyasal Tutumunun Oluşmasında Siyasetçinin İkna Becerilerinin Etkisi. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(20), 243‐248.
  • Kaya, F. (2005). Yerel Gazetelerin Okuyucularının Siyasi Tercihlerine Etkisi.
  • YayınlanmamışYüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Marketing Türkiye (2016). Önümüzdeki 20 Yıla Y Kuşağı Yön Verecek, 312, 84-85. Mengi, Z. (2009). İş Başarısında Kuşak Farkı. 7 Eylül 2017 tarihinde http://www.kigem.com/isbasarisinda-kusak-farki.html sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Özer, Y. (2011). En Yeni Nesil. 30 Eylül 2017 tarihinde http://www.yaprakozer.com/2011/05/17/enyeni-nesil/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Parment, A. (2013). Generation Y vs. BabyBoomers: Shopping Behavior, Buyer Involvement and Implications for Retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(2), 189-199.
  • Reeves, T. C. & Oh, E. (2008). Generational Differences. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 3, 295-303.
  • Reynolds,J., Stewart, M., MacDonald, R. & Sischo, L. (2006). Have adolescents become too ambitious? High school seniors’ educational and occupational plans, 1976 to 2000. Social Problems, 53, 186-206.
  • Rosenberg, J. (2008). Mind Your Generation. Journal of Property Managment, 73(6), 41-44.
  • Smola, K. W. & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363–382.
  • Takao, Y. (2009). Aging and Political Participation in Japan: The Dankai Generation in a Political Swing. Asian Survey, 49(5), 852-872.
  • Tessler, M., Konold, C. & Reif, M. (2004). Political Generations in Developing Countries: Evidence and Insights from Algeria. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(2), 184-216.
  • Tokgöz, O. (1979). Siyasal Haberleşme ve Kadın. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Yayını.
  • Toruntay, H. (2011). Takım Rolleri Çalışması: X Ve Y Kuşağı Üzerinde Karşılaştırılmalı Bir Araştırma. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • Twenge, J. M. (2010), Generationaldifferences in workvalues: A review of theempiricalevidence. Journal of Business andPsychology, 102, 1045-1062.
  • Urdal, H. (2006). AClash of Generations? YouthBulgesandPoliticalViolence.International StudiesQuarterly, 50(3) , 607-629.
  • Uztuğ, F. (2004). Siyasal İletişim Yönetimi Siyasette Marka Yaratmak. İstanbul: MediaCat.
  • Williams, K. C. & Page, R. A. (2011) . Marketing to the Generations. Journal of Behavioral Studies in Business, 3, 1-17.
  • Wolton, D. (1990). Political Communication: The Construction of A Model. European Journal of Communication. 5, 9-28.