I can offer some general insights on how such actions might influence public perception of a leader's cognitive abilities.
Perception of Transparency: The frequency and openness of public appearances and press conferences can impact how the public perceives a leader's transparency and willingness to engage with the media and the public. Limited appearances might lead to perceptions of being less transparent or accessible.
Speculation and Conspiracy Theories: When a leader reduces public exposure, it can lead to speculation and conspiracy theories about their health, cognitive abilities, or potential hidden agendas. Such rumors can spread quickly, affecting public opinion.
Media Framing: How the media covers and portrays a leader's limited appearances can influence public perception. Positive or negative framing can shape how people interpret the reasons behind reduced public engagements.
Supporter vs. Critic Perspectives: Supporters of a leader might be more forgiving or understanding of limited public appearances, while critics could use them as evidence of a leader's inability to perform their duties effectively.
Impact on Political Opponents: Political opponents may use the reduced public appearances as a point of attack, questioning the leader's fitness for office.
Importance of Policy Actions: While public appearances and press conferences are essential for communication, policy actions and their results often have a more significant impact on public opinion about a leader's abilities and effectiveness.
Historical Comparisons: Public perception may be influenced by comparisons with other leaders who had more or less public exposure during their time in office.
It's important to remember that public perception is a complex and multifaceted process, influenced by various factors beyond just public appearances. The media, political climate, policy decisions, and overall communication strategy all play roles in shaping how the public perceives a leader's cognitive abilities and effectiveness.