Parliament is not a catwalk. It is not a studio for sponsored content. It is not a space where politics becomes a lifestyle narrative for social media. And yet, that is exactly the message sent when Direct Democracy MP Diana Constantinide, immediately after a plenary session, chooses to inform the public not about her positions, interventions, or initiatives, but about what she was wearing.
Of course, no one forbids a politician from having personality, aesthetic sense, or a social media presence. The problem arises when image swallows substance. When political communication is reduced to colours, fabrics, and boutiques, while society struggles under the weight of high costs, housing issues, low wages, and a general erosion of trust in institutions.
Even more concerning is that such practices are presented as normal. As if there is no problem when politics is treated as a consumer product and MPs become influencers. As if a polished video could replace accountability, policy-making, and genuine representation of citizens.
The public reaction is entirely justified. It is not, as some may rush to claim, an obsession with what a female politician wears. It stems from a reasonable expectation that citizens should see seriousness where the public interest is at stake. When the first image projected by parliament resembles an advertisement, disappointment is inevitable.
The crisis of trust in politics did not arise overnight. It is fed daily by behaviours that give the impression politicians’ priorities are light-years away from the concerns of society. And when public discussion revolves around a turquoise dress rather than a legislator’s work, the problem is not the dress. The problem is politics.
