In democracies, when there is a balance between opposition and power, success is achieved when a single party is not an absolute judge. This article is entirely taken in keeping with this motive.

According to the June 24th election results, the distribution of seats in the parliament has been settled, discussed and discussed, but there is a topic that is skipped. The only task the opponent has to do is not to raise and lower hands on the parliamentary chairs, but to make the rhetoric, opinion, public opinion, perception management and accepting or supporting the people. No matter how many of the constitutional proportions that the people do not want, the ruling party can not come to ignore it. When it comes to ignorance, maybe it is the people who can not make a voice in the first one but if this becomes continuous, it will be an early election or the people will pour into the street. If governments are tasked not to do anything other than what the people want, the main opposition should be provided in the heart of the people, not the parliament. This should be the sole duty of an opposition party.

The exchange of the leaders of the opposition parties, the exchange of the management team, and so on, is just the front. The opposition, especially the main opposition, needs to change its communication strategy. The main opposition saw the leader change before that, the result is obvious. The point is not how those people want to get their votes, but how those people guarantee it. The big mistake is made at exactly this point. Instead of embracing voters in the ruling party, the opposition develops discourse against them. What I want to say is that they are no longer able to say the clichéd Saint Nesin's word or sheep argument. What I want to say is that after making a decision, if that decision is wrong or right, then that decision will defend themselves with a willingness to justify themselves. If you say you have done wrong with the voters who voted for the ruling party, then the voter will not make any difference, either wrong or right, and he will develop arguments to defend himself in a way that will make you unfair.

The opposition must first change its strategy, leaving it with very harsh rhetoric against the party or the person whom it votes or does not vote for. Like thieves, discourses like dictators are failing discourses and should not be sustained. It is imperative that the opposition softens and embraces the discourses so that it can be effective in the public, leaving a sincere impression. It is imperative that voters who vote for the ruling party are well-informed, well-educated and develop counter-strategies accordingly. If you give me the game on the height of the dollar, this is the opposite. (Tepti) Because the electoral psychology of the voting party to the ruling party quickly developed a counter-argument. "The economy is not important, I will vote for what is right for my country to remain hungry," he said. Because these are the games of external forces. When you say to a person in this psychology, "You can not be assigned, we will appoint you when we come, power is bad", the believer's premiere will be more important than if I am a business owner. (Said)

I can feel it especially difficult for the people on the opposing side to read these lines. That's the point. The opposition must respond in this conjuncture to a strategy that is unorthodox against this strategy of power and provide a balance to the public. Politicians confuse the concepts of "consistency" and "coherence" with street mouths. Yesterday, today, people do not perceive the present day speech as a skepticism and they can see it as a legitimate politician. It is perceived as a virtue to accept that an opinion you defend yesterday is wrong, not a weakness or a skepticism in society. On the other hand, if there are discordant discourses between your current views, it is a big blow to coherence. This, in turn, destroys respect and trust in the electorate. I will explain it with an example. Dictatorial discourse is a discourse that loses coherence. The opponent does not have a large portion of the population of the dictator who is able to make a choice in a mutual race. He is the one who does not go with the election because the dictator. For this reason, what I just mentioned is a hard discourse that will reverse.

Another issue is the sincerity that must be provided in the strategy. If the unassigned teachers go away from the example, it is not sincere to choose all the teachers who can not assign the discourse. It does not seem convincing for people to be civil servants or a large part of society. Rather, it is necessary to say that the universities are not profession-building courses, that the relevant departments of the universities are more open to the needs, and that the existing victims have different alternatives. This is an example of the entire approach I have been discussing, but the solution found is a separate discussion on the truth. It is not a useful method to make fun of divided ways. To say that instead of underestimating the actions performed by the government, it can do better, the details to tell the way through the heart of the elector who voted for power. It is hard to make credibility after the election as "I will do the fourth bridge" as well, unless you want to make it sound like you are told to say, but if you have to make the model and if you do not explain it, these are our projects.

The opposition ranks the language ranks at the moment. There's no point in taking all the raptures in the ruling party back to the party. You can make your election happy by attacking what the electorate of the ruling party has loved, voted for, and regarded as sacred, but that electorate is already in your hands and will not give you anything. The opposition has been working for young people for a long time. In this case, I have a commercial that I like very much. Animation of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. It was a really nice job. It's nice to have a job, it can even sound in the advertising world, but is it enough to change the opinion of the voters? In particular, is it enough to take over the votes of the opposing party you are targeting? Do you touch the hearts of those who voted for your opponent to "wish for a world without you"? This strategy, this understanding needs to change. The new communication strategy must be built precisely on winning the hearts of competing party votes. Certainly the last two months of the election must be continued without slowing down the work by anticipating the next elections, without waiting for the last two months.

Along with a general change in the strategy, the method also has to change. According to the opposition, Shu'an has 95% of the media in the hands of the ruling party. It is not important to identify this situation, it is important what you are doing against it. The strategy that the government sees on the traditional media side is truly amazing. To keep the level of the opposition at the level of the Spokesman. Like the spokesman, newspapers such as the republic and similar websites only cause the ranks of voters who vote in power to tighten their ranks. Above all, it is necessary that either these or similar media have the ability to be represented, or that they change their crust, to be accepted by rival party voters. One of the biggest reasons why the opposition can not vote is the foreign language of the media power. But with the media that it can penetrate, the election is unlikely. In particular, channels like NTV should be discontinued and supported. As soon as independent news channels and sites are supported in the community's eyes, the owners of those publications should get rid of the idea that "we are publishing only one electoral mass, because they are only following us".

Businessmen, especially those who are close to the opposition party and financially capable of funding 8-10 employees, should open news sites, not high-cost ones like newspapers or TVs, and work with professional digital marketing teams to become alternative voices. However, these sites should be sites that appeal to a much broader range than the local, small publications (like I have made up the name) of Ağrı's Voice. You can not direct voting voters when news sites that change the agenda in Internet journalism are the British BBC and Russian Sputnik.

I remember Obama's first election. He certainly could not find himself in the traditional media. He had separated his entire budget from social networks and digital news sites. There is general consensus at this point, that despite the opposition in the social media, it loses in the elections. This is not the weakness of social media, but the fact that the opposition is not in a good position to govern social media. It is only the country that is filled with political parties that make TT on Twitter to bring about what they want. That's not the way! You are not really on the agenda in people's hearts when you go to TT, the name "Agenda". It is important that the voters who vote on your opponent are brought in by the accounts they will consider. The transmission of your message in a way that you will consider, do not alter, do not remind you of insults. Social media content shared by people with different views according to the research done by the other party not seen, not read. There were so many people standing there, people talking for days. Has he ever seen a political Cambridge Analyitica? I do not understand that the methods used do not try to use the systems that work. I hardly ever come across digital advertising during the election. I do not mean ridiculous banners that carry photographs of three or five party presidents and do not convey any emotion or message. No personalized ads. There was no appeal to the segregated voters. Yes, I talked about the Adwords advertising on Ibrahim Tatlıses, but there was no effective work on digital media. I do not understand that they do not invest in the digital which is the only exit gate of the parties who have the saying "I can not find a place in Hele hele media". This job is not to send a shuttle in the distance, but every day in Istanbul, the continent shifts to "the 3rd bridge is not very expensive? If you traffic from him, we'll cheat, "or you will not be able to sell something abroad to Facebook and Instagram users who like Paypal's page? We'll bring Paypal back. " Is it so difficult to target Uber users and target the booking users? Is it difficult to target retirees? Is it difficult to ask them if they can afford your salary or to end the vampire moths ruining your crops in Rize?

I know it is very hard for politicians to accept it, but rallying does not work. It was time to rally during the periods when there was no TV and no social media but it was time to transfer the money spent on the rallies to the digits according to the MHP's opinion that it maintained the rate of votes without any rallies. Naturally, only your own voters come to the rallies. Have you ever seen a maniac go to the rallies of all parties and vote for the most beautiful talker? The nation has the power to work. To make advertisements by targeting according to segments, to make live broadcasts via Scope or Instagram, to speak out on Youtube channels (Şükür Babala TV is a leader, super job) Questioning in Ekşisözlük has become a standard thing to do now.

US President Barack Obama presents the Presidential Medal of Freedom to broadcast journallist Oprah Winfrey during a ceremony in the White House on November 20, 2013 in Washington, DC. The Medal of Freedom is the country's foremost civilian honor. AFP PHOTO / Mandel NGAN (Photo credit should read MANDEL NGAN / AFP / Getty Images)

We keep trying to rediscover America. Oprah Winfrey is the server of the most viewed talk show in the US. One of the world's 100 most powerful people because the power is enormous, people trust him. Only a million people voted for Obama after the announcement of his support to Obama. Working with opinion leaders is one of the most politically motivated jobs. In the last elections, I did not see anything other than an influencer coming out and consolidating what they would vote for the ruling saying "foot odor". No opposition party did Influencer Marketing. "Could there be such a thing?" There is a general misinformation about the fact that only the young people follow the influencers (if Puccaa's tweet was paid for the fee, prepare the fiction). My 56 born birthdays follow the influencers in my 63 born father. They are not early adapters, they are typical X-belt members. Even if they are following this very high penetration of internet and social media are having followed a huge cut influencer in Turkey. However, we need to keep an eye on our influencer definition. You just have to see funny tweets or makeup videos as influencers. Influencer is a very broad definition. These opinion leaders need to be supported as an assistant to take the support of your message.

Marketing influencia work with the limited vision of Turkey and the Turks to keep influencer, you need to reach even the Germans influencer to reach voters in Germany. It's not that hard to find the influencers that respectful people have with respect. Another area that I think comes from ignoring and ignoring in local elections is micro-influencers. There are many influencers in particular, which are followed by their own region in the motherland. There are too many people who really trust him to vote politics they point to. There is no connection with this generation. Mankind gives the decision to buy from the first day by word of mouth marketing this day. It is a mental detention not to use this most effective persuasion method at all.

The opposition will make the biggest mistake by transmitting the same message from all message channels. A different message must be generated for each different channel. Different according to Influencer's past, different by Youtube channel to broadcast, different message according to the person to show the advertisement. The main discourse has to be the same (consistency) and the things mentioned must be different. This is the disadvantage of campaigns run on TV. When you say nationalist choice and I look pleasant, you are blowing up the others.

There is a single type of advertising for opposition, especially on both TV and digital ads. Fear ads. When I say horror commercial, I do not mean the Republic's black-market advertisement. There is no other alternative than othering, empathy-filled advertising. Advertisements should be made that appeal to the disgruntled people, claim them, and make their accusations stand out. Beginning from the point where everyone agrees, such as merit, staffing, voters can be earned by advertisements made with respect to the bounty of the disgruntled people, with respect to the votes they have given. The end of this horror pumping to be done is the balance of the ruling party's strand of the arm of the hand, which can be achieved without any other way. CHP How can an advertising language win elections? 

At the end of the day, you are the voters who want the only country to get better. It does not matter whether it is party or party, everyone's immediate home. It is a good opposition that will provide a power that makes good deeds. The good thing about the opposition is that it can provide healthy communication.