Taylor Swift has endorsed the Democratic nominees Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.
*
Politically and culturally the endorsement is significant, but this is not really a political or cultural blog.
This is, however, a blog that sometimes provides close readings of key documents, and there are things about the endorsement that are perhaps worth noticing and remarking upon.
In essence: this endorsement is a masterpiece of practical written advocacy, and many law schools would do well to put it before their students.
*
Look carefully at the first three paragraphs – especially the use of the first person “I” and “me/my” and the second person “you” (emphasis added):
“Like many of you, I watched the debate tonight. If you haven’t already, now is a great time to do your research on the issues at hand and the stances these candidates take on the topics that matter to you the most. As a voter, I make sure to watch and read everything I can about their proposed policies and plans for this country.
“Recently I was made aware that AI of ‘me’ falsely endorsing Donald Trump’s presidential run was posted to his site. It really conjured up my fears around AI, and the dangers of spreading misinformation. It brought me to the conclusion that I need to be very transparent about my actual plans for this election as a voter. The simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth.
“I will be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the 2024 Presidential Election. I’m voting for @kamalaharris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them. I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos. I was so heartened and impressed by her selection of running mate @timwalz, who has been standing up for LGBTQ+ rights, IVF, and a woman’s right to her own body for decades.”
*
In the first paragraph, she ensures that she identifies with you the reader – “Like many of you [comma]” and “As a voter [comma]”.
There are four “yous” in that first paragraph: you, you, you, you.
You are already half-nodding along. You and Swift have common ground.
*
In the second paragraph, she then describes things of personal concern – but here she avoids putting “I” at the start of any sentence. This makes it look that she is describing the situation objectively.
She deftly – and convincingly – justifies making a political endorsement. The sentences “It brought me to the conclusion that I need to be very transparent about my actual plans for this election as a voter. The simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth.” are perfectly reasonable.
Two premises leading to a “conclusion”, and in just one paragraph.
*
You will see that so far she has avoided starting any sentence with “I”.
And then, with the third paragraph, wham.
The first sentence beginning with “I” is the actual endorsement.
And then every sentence in the third paragraph begins with “I”: bam bam bam.
*
Also, like any good advocate, Swift is careful to make the listener or reader feel that it is their own decision to make, and again this is skilfully done:
“I’ve done my research, and I’ve made my choice. Your research is all yours to do, and the choice is yours to make.”
Note the rhythm: I, I, you, you, you.
The most effective persuasion is often to lead the listener or reader to making their own decision – and to make them feel they are making their own decision.
*
Finally, the pay-off: the thing that will linger.
The reader is already half-aware of what is coming, because of the photograph.
A good pay-off is often a call-back – and here, cleverly, the call-back is to the visual clue the reader would have registered before even reading.
“With love and hope,
Taylor Swift
Childless Cat Lady”
This is, of course, a swipe and a blow against J. D. Vance, the Republican vice presidential nominee.
And so Swift mocks the Lilliputian.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome, or if they risk derailing the discussion.
More on the comments policy is here.
Masterful
I had already read the endorsement, and was suitably impressed and ‘touched’ as intended.
The way you fillet and present the build up of the text is recommendable in its own way, I salute you for this…
I always enjoy reading your comments, thank you very much!
Brilliant. Many thanks DAG. As a one-time (pretty much) advocate, but still law and blog writer, I am debating whether to adopt a style nearer to what you describe. It’s fine – the personal pronoun (I) – for blogs.
But in law articles, oh dear. I tend still to adopt the absurd – surely? – ‘this author takes the view’ and the like. That form is based on a publisher’s style guide of 35 years ago. I need to find out from my editors if I can loosen my style.
And then to court skeleton arguments. ‘It is submitted that…’ – ie that means ‘I say [whatever] as you can see from [following arguments]’, and you judge, please listen to me’. Hmmm?
The art is in removing the first person completely and still making the same points.
That’s what I was taught years back as a journalist: keep the ‘I’ out of it. But today, I believe that though necessary in official and academic writing and most particularly in direct communication, the third person feels distant and detached. So when I want to connect directly with my reader, I address them as if I’m speaking to them – that requires the ‘I’ and the ‘you’.
I also like the measured praise “I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos.”
If you’re trying to persuade the undecided, sycophancy is probably not going to work.
She also doesn’t directly attack Trump as chaotic, she let’s the reader take that obvious conclusion.
Hmmm. Of course Swift is a gifted business person, with a flair for marketing and for bringing people on board (as noted here). At reading a market, at avoiding PR mis-steps, and shifting product, she is superb.
She is resolutely mediocre as an artist though. As with Coldplay, Sheeran et al, she’s so beige that she washes over me in the same way that, in previous decades, Barry Manilow and Sheena Easton washed over me – so beige that, on examining myself, no discernible reactions were apparent lol.
But at least nobody back then tried to assure us that the wildly-popular but utterly vapid Manilow was a towering figure, a pop music genius. Swift is a smart pap-vendor, like so many other smart pap-vendors down the decades, nothing more.
Hmmm. Of course Dickens is a gifted business person, with a flair for marketing and for bringing people on board (as noted here). At reading a market, at avoiding PR mis-steps, and shifting product, he is superb.
He is resolutely mediocre as a writer though. As with Thackeray, Wilkie Collins et al, he’s so beige that he washes over me in the same way that, in previous decades, Henry Fielding washed over me – so beige that, on examining myself, no discernible reactions were apparent lol.
But at least nobody back then tried to assure us that the wildly-popular but utterly vapid Samuel Richardson was a towering figure, a writing genius. Dickens is a smart pap-vendor, like so many other smart pap-vendors down the decades, nothing more.
It must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-hero. You need to shake it off.
Haters gonna hate.
Taylor Swift is a class act across the board. End of sentence.
Amen
A whole bunch of irrelevant non sequiturs here.
I don’t really like Swift’s music either and am not remotely fussed about her as an artist.
But whether she is a high capable artist or just mediocre (both of which are subjective judgements) does not change the impact of her endorsing Harris.
She has clearly thought hard about how to write the endorsement. And both the way she has written it and the fact she has made it all will be a strong influence on many people (Swifties or not). And it is these points that DAG was commenting on.
I endorse this signoff
I read the endorsement this morning and realised the significance but could not put my finger on the reason that it resonated. I appreciate the analysis. As an aside, Trump needed to do something last night to turn the tide and Harris did well enough to maintain her momentum. Like constitutional matters, I would like politics to return to being a dull and dry subject with less hyperbole and more substance.
Indeed, very well written.
I wonder by whom?
I think that it may have been written by one of greatest songwriters of her generation, who knows how to communicate very effectively with her fans. She knows how to use words.
She does indeed. She is very sharp. All the rules you explain are intuitively known by a great communicator.
Brilliant last line DAG.
Many thanks for the analysis David. I had read Ms Swift’s endorsement earlier and what leapt off the page were two of the points you’ve made, but really caught my attention.
The first was “I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos” something coincidentally, current Tory MPs could learn, but harked back to something the country had in spades during Trump’s term in office and his promises to continue in the same vein if he’s elected. This will have chimed with Swift’s typical fanbase who will have seen and experienced this chaos, the riots and mayhem that Trump (allegedly) encouraged.
But secondly the emphasis on this statement being her decision (only) to vote for Harris, and the need for everyone to do their own research and make their own choice; less of a direct endorsement of Harris and more of “do your thing, get out and vote”
It’s hardly surprising Trump and his entourage have been concerned about a potential endorsement from Ms Swift going the wrong way; but wonderfully ironic how his own actions determined her reason for for doing so.
Taylor Swift’s music does not interest me. I would not recognise a Taylor Swift song if I heard one. But opinions and likes/dislikes of her music are surely irrelevant in the forum in which she makes this statement. What is relevant is the huge potential influence over her squillions of social-media followers, and so I applaud and respect the skill of her calm, measured statement, so insightfully dissected and analysed by DAG.
I’m not particularly a fan of her music either. It’s better than bubblegum pop, but nothing earth-shattering. I am a fan of the person, the way she fearlessly does her own thing and how she carries herself. She is a force, and I think a force for good. You don’t mess with Taylor Swift.
Nor me. I find it a bit samey, though the lyrics are more interesting than the melody (Bob Dylan anyone?). But shush my daughter is a Swifty. She’s very bright and has integrity and has obviously read the right books to have called her cat Benjamin Bunny. Her endorsement may make many thousand young people register and vote and who could argue that is a bad thing in a democracy?
I think Taylor Swift is, all round, the most fascinating figure in media.
A good singer, a great performer, an outstanding songwriter, and an extraordinary businesswoman and master of IP and media.
There are modern singers I prefer – Lorde, Del Rey – but Swift is a phenomenon.
She is indeed a phenomenon. And I applaud her. My daughter was a music scholar so no slouch in her knowledge of music. TS is also very savvy. Her timing was impeccable. However, one’s musical taste tends to be established in one’s teens, which I am decades away from. BTW, Who remembers Mick Jagger in dialogue with the Archbishop of Canterbury when that representative was an individual to be respected? Her message was well crafted, as are her songs. Everything Trump must hate: a beautiful, thoughtful, creative, talented, intelligent and persuasive woman. Argh.
I am not entirely convinced that Thackeray deserves the scorn you rightly deliver on the pap-vendor Dickens.
Back to the topic in hand – I wonder how many versions of Swift’s spontaneous endorsement were produced before the final one, and how much of it is her own. I suspect nearly all of it, but that she will have asked for other people to comment.
Not that it matters if it has the right effect. I really hope that young people register and use their voting power.
I am not entirely convinced that you could spot a joke holding a banner saying “This is a Joke”.
As for “I wonder how many versions of Swift’s spontaneous endorsement were produced before the final one, and how much of it is her own.”, I think maybe one of the best songwriters of her generation was able to do this by herself.
What if the banner said:
“c’est ne pas la blague.”
?
As Sherlock Holmes would (not) say, that is a no pipe question.
A certain former legal writing person applauds the style and substance of this explication. And might add one tangential observation (non-trivial, but perhaps omitted as not relevant as to the writing per se): Timing is as timing does.
If a tiny 0.1% of the Swifties register and vote for the Dems it could cause a seismic shock throughout the political system, 0.5% would give the Dems the Presidency, House and Senate.
Thanks for this excellent analysis (and that final line!) and the appropriate pushback to those suggesting Swift somehow wasn’t capable of writing the post herself.
I appreciate your blog is geared toward such textual analysis, but my sense is that the iconic photo is at least as important as the text here, and not simply for how it connects with the sign-off (though that is beautifully done). It is an incredibly effective and memorable composition.
That, in combination with its political importance, will probably end up winning it more than a few ‘photo of the year’ awards.
For the remaining weeks until election day it will be widely shared and reused online, a reminder of the endorsement beyond recall of the exact text, or indeed as a nudge to those who didn’t read it but at least comprehend the photo’s context. Powerful images, like powerful music, can reach parts words do not.
All credit to her for everything about this timely intervention.
Like a kidney-patient periodically visiting a dialysis machine, I have found the need, ever since the election of Dubya Bush, to visit periodically the political analysis machine (dismissed by some as “liberal porn”) which is my complete box-sets of “The West Wing”, where the rôle of the speech-writer is deemed a respectable, nay, integral element of good government. Having at her disposal a budget to rival that of many a small country, it is not out of place for this cat-lady to afford professional assistance in expressing her views cogently and effectively, particularly in America.
The American who congratulated the late Donald Dewar on a speech he had just delivered and asked, “Who wrote it” was astonished at the reply: “I did.”
Perhaps one of the best songwriters of her generation may not actually need “professional assistance in expressing her views cogently and effectively, particularly in America”.
You would not say this of, say, Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen or Billy Joel if they put things well in prose. Some people just know how to use words well and how to communicate with their audience.
Honestly, I would expect anyone who was looking to maximise the impact of a communication to seek feedback on it. If you’re writing a song, it’s probably enough that the words speak to you and fit the music, but trusted friends and colleagues can offer interesting insights. It doesn’t matter whether Taylor Swift got advice. The finished product is all hers.
Also true. Every good writer needs good editors and honest feedback. And us less good writers need it even more.