So how did Barack Obama do in his handling of the Rev Wright Fiasco?
I give him an “A” for properly distancing himself from Wright’s past and current statements. I give him a “C” in terms of positioning himself against Wright for the future. And a “D- in terms of his ability to be positive and change the whole terms of the debate. Overall grade for handling this media crisis: “C+”
For starters, Obama did an excellent job of delivering sound bites using excellent emotion and absolutes in denouncing Rev. Wright’s inflammatory comments. Here are the best sound bites Obama said yesterday:
“…when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century, when he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced. And that’s what I’m doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.”
“His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.”
“And based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought, either.”
“I’ve already denounced the comments…”
“…an exploitation of those old divisions…”
“Reverend Wright does not speak for me. He does not speak for our campaign. I cannot prevent him from continuing to make these outrageous remarks.”
“…when I say I find these comments appalling, I mean it. It contradicts everything that I’m about and who I am.”
“…it is completely opposed to what I stand for and where I want to take this country.”
“But the insensitivity and the outrageousness, of his statements and his performance in the question-and-answer period yesterday, I think, shocked me. It surprised me.”
“But I feel very strongly that — well, I want to make absolutely clear that I do not subscribe to the views that he expressed. I believe they are wrong. I think they are destructive.”
“…what Reverend Wright said yesterday directly contradicts everything that I’ve done during my life.”
“All it was, was a bunch of rants that — that aren’t grounded in truth, and you know, I can’t construct something positive out of that. I can understand it. I, you know, the — you know, people do all sorts of things.”
All in all, these are high quality sound bites, filled with emotion, absolutes, and passion—all of them irresistible to reporters looking for a quote in a story. No fair minded person can seriously conclude that Obama endorses Wright’s world view.
When it comes to separating himself from Wright of the present, I give Obama an A+ for his sound bites.
But, where I fault Obama is not giving stronger and more memorable sound bites to inoculate himself from Wright in the future. I would have urged him to say something like this:
“I pledge to the American people that if I am elected president, I will do everything I can to make sure Rev Wright has no impact on my administration’s policies. I will make sure he never steps foot onto the hallowed grounds of the White House. Furthermore any member of my administration who invites Rev. Wright to the White house or even calls him for advice will be summarily fired.”
That is a sound bite that would be widely quoted and would allay people’s concerns that Wright might have influence in the future.
Finally, I think Obama did a poor job of repositioning the issue to force the media to move beyond it. He should have said something like this:
“I have denounced my supporter, Rev. Wright’s extremist views in the most forceful manner possible, yet my opponent, John McCain, has not had to denounce the bigotry of his supporter, Rev John Hagee’s numerous bigoted remarks, nor has John McCain been asked to denounce his support, Rev. Jerry Falwell’s remarks that America deserved 9-11 because we are pro-choice. Why the double standard? I want the American voters to start demanding that the media end this double standard. Enough is enough.”
A statement like this would have forced the media to go on the defensive, changed the dynamic of the story, and forced Sen. McCain to go on the defensive, plus it would have reframed the entire issue in more neutral terms. It would also give Obama defenders a chance to feel like they are on the moral high ground and to move on the attack against the media and other political opponents.
Does anyone know of an expert in starting ad networks? I am looking to start an ad network focusing on web sites that deal with the following topics: speaking, public speaking, presentations, powerpoint and media training. If you know of anyone, please have them contact me at tj@tjwalker.com.
While I was at a cocktail party last night on 14th street in Manhattan, a publicist told me the following: “I don’t want to be on TV ever! I want to be behind the scenes. I’d hate to be a celebrity. They have awful lives. Nothing in their life can be kept secret. Please don’t ask me to ever be interviewed or to give speeches.”
Now, this attitude is an affront to my very being; and it’s a very rare attitude to hear from someone working in Manhattan in media circles. But, this publicist’s perspective is a completely normal attitude held by the vast major of Americans and other psychologically healthy people around the globe.
Two quick thoughts came to mind when I heard the publicist make this comment:
1. There is nothing wrong with valuing privacy rights above fame and fortune , and
2. It’s insanely hard to actually become famous. You don’t become famous with one interview or speech or even with 1000.
Personally, I’ve been interviewed thousands of times and/or interviewed people thousands of times. Yet I am hardly a celebrity. The only way I could get in People Magazine now is if I were to kidnap Britney Spears children.
In a fragmented media world of thousands of reality shows, and a gazillions of web sites, it’s actually harder to become a celebrity these days—not easier. And part of the process is sitting through numerous profile interviews.
One of the central elements of the celebrity manufacturing machine is the full profile interview. In a full profile interview, you often sit with a reporter for several hours; sometimes over several days or even weeks. This type of an interview is much more revealing and personal than, say, a quick interview regarding a new product launch. Unlike an interview where you are a spokesperson for a product or a company, in a profile interview, you are acting as a spokesperson for your own life. The pressure is greater in interviews like this. There is also more time for self-doubts to set in like, “Oh my god, the reporter is asking me what music is on my iPod—I’ll look like a fool if I confess I have nothing more recent on my iPod than Led Zeppelin.”
The rules of how to handle yourself in a media interview still apply during a profile interview, but it requires greater discipline due to their often lengthy nature. There are more opportunities to get too cozy with the reporter and start saying foolish, quotable things. You must still have a focused message and deliver compelling sound bites. But you’ve also got to be really interesting as a person, or the whole interview could get spiked.
So how would I let myself be profiled? See for yourself. I recently sat for several hours over a couple of days with a feature writer in Charlotte, NC.
The significance? It means the ability to speak–on camera–is going to go from being seen as a luxury skill to a basic, essential skill. 35 years ago, an executive graduating from a top law or business school who knew how to type was viewed as having a special, obscure talent. These days, anyone graduating from any school who can’t type is considered an unemployable fool.
Will the ability to speak clearly and confidently in front of a video capture device some day be considered as basic a skill as today’s typing?
Sometimes a reporter will call under deadline and your goal is to get as many quotes in the article, while at the same time, eating up the clock to make it unnecessary and undesirable for the reporter to call your competitors for a quote. Below is a link to a story where I was interviewed for a story by Forbes.
In this particular case, the reporter told me that he was posting the story in just a few hours. I therefore deduced that he didn’t have lots of time to call every media trainer around. I didn’t have a message I cared about getting into the story, but I wanted to get lots of real estate in the story–and make sure my competitors didn’t. So in this case, I broke the normal procedure by taking the call and doing the interview immediately. I went into full sound bite mode in an attempt to overwhelm the reporter with great choices for column filler.
Below are my actual quotes that made it into the story along with an analysis of the sound bite elements that made them quotable for the reporter:
“It’s not like when Lee Iacocca (#1 pop culture reference) could buy (#2 action oriented) an ad on three networks (#3 specific example) and hit (#4 action-oriented) the whole world (#5 absolute) in 1979 when everyone (#6 absolute) would see it,” Walker said, adding that this is the one task a CEO can’t simply assign.
“A CEO can delegate (#7 action-oriented) sales, accounting (#7 action-oriented), marketing (#8 action-oriented), but the one thing (#9 absolute) that the CEO cannot delegate is speaking (#10 action-oriented) on behalf of a whole organization (#11 absolute) to the entire world (#12 absolute).”
One dozen sound bite elements–in under 5 minutes. That’s how you don’t end up on the cutting room floor.
I feel for former President Bill Clinton. He is, by all accounts, an indefatigable campaigner, often getting by with less than four hours sleep. Well, apparently even Clinton gets tired. Below is a video clip of Clinton snoozing and attempting in vain to stay awake while on the stage behind a speaker. My cheap easy advice is for everyone to get at least 8 hours of sleep, not only on days when you are speaking, but also when you are going to be near any0one else who is speaking and might have a video camera pointed at him or her. If you need motivation to get a good night’s sleep, then you need to watch this.
As much as I think Bill Clinton is a master communicator, no one is perfect. Lately, he has been a little too quick to appear angry at reporters. There is a role for anger, but it must be used sparingly and for big issues only, especially if you have the stature of being a former president.
Hats off to Tiger Woods’ agent Mark Steinberg. Recently, there was controversy when Golf Channel commentator Kelly Tilghman suggested that young players on the PGA would “lynch Tiger Woods in a back alley.”
Steinberg made the following response on behalf of Woods, “Regardless of the choice of words used we know unequivocally that there was no ill-intent in her comments. This story is a non-issue in our eyes.”
This is a brilliant sound bite and message because it does the following:
1. Addresses the issue squarely.
2. Recognizes that something inappropriate happened.
3. Sends a forgiving message.
4. Minimizes the issue in such a way as to make Tiger Woods seem like a class act who transcends petty racial squabbles.
5. Keeps Woods above the fray by not having him quoted directly.
6. Contains classic sound bite elements such as absolutes and emotions, thus guaranteeing placement in multiple media outlets.
I don’t normally advise stars avoiding media comment and having agents or spokespeople speak on their behalf, but in this case, I think the Woods team made a smart decision by having Steinberg diffuse the issue with his statement.
Fantastic CNN feature story today on audience members falling asleep and doing other distracting things while politicians speak. This is a funny piece and it just goes to show you that no matter how good a speaker you are, you can’t captivate everyone in your audience.
