YES. The Hearts for Yes campaign for the soon to be voted referendum to approve CAFTA in Costa Rica, currently on television, is either a mistake or a success, but nowhere in between. It has captured people’s attention and provoked many comments, of which I have heard particularly negative, annoyed and even offended. Personally, I think it is simply fatal.
Let’s see a sample of what we are talking about.

I would have loved to have been present at the presentation of this campaign, to hear the arguments. Likewise, I would have found it interesting to witness the discussion and the process up to the approval that has led us to have in the air such an offense to the intelligence of Costa Ricans. Facing a crucial decision for our country, as well as the first referendum in our history, the Yes has lent itself to a public ridicule of truly incomprehensible proportions.
In this blog I have tried to avoid unnecessary polemics, but rather, to edify and add. However, it is not possible to remain mute in the face of such a crude and clumsy propagandistic manifestation as the one presented today by these messages. It is also important to add a concept of depth, because the only difference between manipulation and persuasion is precisely another word: integrity.
In order not to remain in words, let’s see one more example of this unnecessarily polemic campaign, one that tries to manipulate even with patriotic symbols of high emotional significance such as the heart:

Being creative is easy, attracting attention even more, provoking controversy takes a few keystrokes, and of course, making an impact is a matter of an instant. Confusing these concepts and resorting to witticisms just for the sake of being different, forgets the essence of a successful strategy, obscures the desired transparency and clouds the clear and crystalline message that a topic of this magnitude deserves.
What is not said, what is not understood, what is expressed between the lines or what is babbled, often leads to gaps that people can fill with speculation. A few poorly connected dots are enough, and what you get is the wrong emotion, such as anger, rage or the sting of zeal, the feeling of offense or humiliation. They have indeed chosen a very dangerous path, one that should be corrected at the earliest opportunity.
I propose to the Yes leaders an immediate change of course in their communication. One that reflects their clear intent, their noble proposals and the extraordinary intentions that mobilized the FTA negotiating group. When you don’t have to, you don’t have to fear, and for this reason, there is no need for a complex campaign of unnecessarily sarcastic, caricatured and even mocking interweavings.
Whatever the position of each Costa Rican with respect to NAFTA, it deserves respect and consideration. It deserves information, arguments and debate. Although opinions divide us, passions should lead to conciliation and serenity, harmony and national unity. We are divided by no or yes, but not by hatred or other irreconcilable emotions.
I am in favor of NAFTA and I consider that it is a risk we have to take. However, I do not agree with the absence of transparency reflected in this campaign nor with this bland communication formula, one that disrespects our intelligence and disregards disregard for a noble sector of the population.