The Media Interview

A comment by one of presidential candidate John McCain’s advisors, quoted in a Fortune magazine article, has created quite a stir and raises an interesting issue about the transparency of media interviews.

Here’s part of the LA Times story on the comments by Charlie Black:

Then, the longtime political pro got a bit too honest. Asked about the political impact of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, Black replied: “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him.”

Black may be correct, but he’s not supposed to be quite so blunt in coldly calculating the upside for McCain of harm coming to Americans. Others — unconnected with the campaign — could offer such an assessment, but he should have dodged the question.

He knows it, and The Times’ Maeve Reston reports that outside a McCain fundraiser today in Fresno, Black said: “I deeply regret the comments — they were inappropriate. I recognize that John McCain has devoted his entire adult life to protecting his country and placing its security before every other consideration.”

McCain, for his part, did what he’s supposed to do — stressing his lifelong commitment to protecting America and flat out disputing Black’s premise. “It’s not true,” he said when asked in Fresno about his aide’s remark.

Black’s regret at his comments suggests that this was indeed a major slip of the tongue during an interview - there’s no claim that he was taken out of context or anything like that.

For the record, here’s the quote in the context of the Fortune article:

On national security McCain wins. We saw how that might play out early in the campaign, when one good scare, one timely reminder of the chaos lurking in the world, probably saved McCain in New Hampshire, a state he had to win to save his candidacy - this according to McCain’s chief strategist, Charlie Black. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an “unfortunate event,” says Black. “But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.” As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,” says Black.

While it seems that the reporter has been accurate in framing this quote - Black has had ample opportunity to challenge the accuracy - it would be fascinating to read the transcript of that portion of the interview.

It’s a good example of how we trust journalists (mainstream or otherwise) to boil down all of their information into a story which still accurately captures meaning. Sadly, that trust is lacking among the general public - journalists are often well down in the poll results of people we trust - and I think one way they can regain that is to use the freedom of the internet to back up their stories with transparency (printing transcripts, for example). Which is not to say that this is an easy thing to do; how would you like people questioning your work based on the misjudgments or outright lies of others in your industry?

As for Black, I like the LA Times comment: “he should have dodged the question.”

The worlds of US politics and journalism are still reeling from the sudden death on Friday of Meet the Press host Tim Russert. The 58 year old Washington bureau chief for NBC news had just finished taping The Tim Russert Show for CNBC and was working on voice-overs for Sunday’s Meet the Press when he collapsed and died of a heart attack.

Russert took over the helm of Meet the Press in 1991 and was the longest-serving host of the 60 year old institution. Many people have quoted Russert as saying it wasn’t his show - he was only a custodian of it - but Lawrence K Grossman, the president of NBC news 1984-1988, gave this assessment to the NY Times:

[Tim Russert] saved ‘Meet the Press,’ which had been in big trouble because it was not being watched, it was a half hour, it wasn’t different from the other programs. It had launched the whole Sunday morning information programming but had been very disappointing and nothing seemed to fix it properly until he came along.

I’ve gathered some quotes about Russert’s interview style from the many TV tributes over the weekend.

Betsy Fischer, Executive Producer for Meet the Press, commenting on how Russert’s legal background helped him:

…the way he would structure the questions was very lawyerly. He always knew how a candidate was going to respond - he was prepared enough to know that - and he would sketch it out in his mind: I’m going to ask A, that’ll get us to B, that’ll get us around to C, and then… there’s D. And he knew how to get you into that cycle and he was very skilled at that.

Political strategist James Carville, who prepared many politicians to be on Meet the Press:

… it was a very easy show to prepare for, in the sense you knew he was not going to ask you any questions out of left field, you knew his thing was going to be entitlements, you knew his thing was going to be past statements, you knew… you knew where he was coming from. So, in one sense it was a very hard show, but you could prepare for it, because it was very fair, always very fair.

As one of the other commentators put it, it was your own fault if you messed up on Meet the Press because you didn’t do your homework the way Russert did.

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, appearing on Larry King Live, was someone who experienced firsthand Russert’s penchant for finding old quotes and playing them back for guests:

It was such an honor to be on his show and yet it was terrifying, I’ve got to tell you. …we would all get ourselves ready and prepared to be on the show and I ah, heard some of your other guests talking about these quotes that he would put up. I remember the first time it happened to me, I came back to my office and I said ‘You guys are not going to believe this - Tim had me debating with myself.’ [Laughter] You know, how could I have said that? And so, it was really an amazing method of extracting information, but the part about it too, Larry, was that he always let you answer and really be able to explain yourself, even if it sometimes it was difficult.

I haven’t been able to find the quote, but someone else mentioned that Russert was very good at really listening to what a guest had to say - he didn’t just throw out these quotes and then move on, he listened to the response and followed up with relevant questions.

Since taking office in 2006 Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been known for almost complete control of media access to his government. The Hill is the latest to run a story about these practices:

When [national] reporters request interviews, the minister’s office passes on the request with its recommendations to the Prime Minister’s Office. Ministerial offices file information such as the length of time required for the interview, the topics to be discussed, the potential angle of the story, and proposed communications lines. Whether the PMO approves the interview may depend on any one of these factors, as well as the PMO’s level of trust in the minister to keep to script and conduct a successful interview. The Prime Minister’s Office is more likely to strike down controversial or long interview requests, for instance….

The Conservative media strategy is largely geared to local media, for which interviews do not require PMO approval. Local news comes first, and the strategy is derived in part from the last election campaign, when the Prime Minister focused on getting out his messages out through local, supper-hour newscasts on private stations. “The PMO is very clear. Anyone can do local media without PMO approval,” the insider said.

The Hill does not provide direct access to articles, so you’ll have to search their site for the rest of this piece, entitled “PMO clears media requests, some Cabinet ministers not allowed to talk”.