Rhetorica: Press-Politics Journal

Interviewing skills are tough to teach. I only touch on the subject briefly in my Introduction to Journalism class. I’m far more concerned that they learn the discourse first (and something of journalism history).

I’m prompted to write about interviewing today because of this short post at the Center for Citizen Media blog (quoting Slate):

You know it’s 2007 when a candidate, in this case Mike Huckabee, holds a bifurcated conference call, first with reporters, then with bloggers. I listened in on both calls to see what the differences were. The reporters’ questions were much more concise and polished. But the bloggers’ questions were more substantive by a long shot.

The only thing wrong with this picture is the bifurcation. Put them all on the same call, candidates.

Scroll down this blog essay and you’ll find this interesting bit:

I saw an interesting moment on Hardball with Chris Matthews on Friday, 23 May. MSNBC pollster Frank Luntz was questioning a panel of voters. His opening question: “Regardless of who you’re voting for, what characteristic do you want in a Democratic nominee?” After several people responded, Luntz said (with my clarifying remarks):

We’ll [the press] talk about personalities for the Democrats and you [the panel] all keep bringing it back to policy. That’s an interesting dynamic. Up until now, people [who?] were looking for, as you used, bold leadership, honesty, a vision for the future. [Luntz turns to the camera] And yet they’re all talking policy. [To the panel] Is that where the Democratic nominee is going to go, rather than focusing on attributes, they’re going to focus on policy?

Luntz continues to mention, with a sense of wonder, the panel’s interest in policy. Matthews and his guests ignore it. Here is Luntz’s concluding remark that Matthews cuts off to return to his guests:

I asked them to talk about candidates, talk about attributes and they kept coming back to issues. That says to me that there’s no Democrat out there that’s really captured the hearts and mind of the public as an alternative to George Bush. It is early, but there’s no one out there that’s got a clear…

In other words, the panel’s interest in policy, the day-to-day stuff of governance that affects peoples’ lives, is proof that no candidate has a convincing presidential image or master narrative…Luntz wants them bow to the press’ master narratives. But these citizens realize there is another narrative to be told, a narrative largely ignored during campaign coverage: The story of how policy affects the lives of average Americans.

It’s not at all surprising that journalists’ questions are often more “concise and polished.” But what if they are are not asking the right questions, i.e. questions that attempt to get the information that interests citizens?

(Wow. Think about that. A journalism that fails to ask the right questions is not simply useless, it’s dangerous. And stupid.)

Citizen journalists, bloggers, people who go to town hall meetings, usually ask substantive questions because–SUPRISE!!!–they are interested in governance–the stuff that affects their lives. When you’re worried about health care or the moral direction of the country, it’s damned hard to work up any interest at all in which candidate has raised more money this quarter or who’s ahead in the polls in Iowa.

Take a look at this Power Point presentation that I created to teach advanced students about interviewing. You’ll get an idea where my head is on this. But please note that professional political journalism isn’t ready for this concept I call “critical reporting.” The pros won’t be ready until they learn to do the very basic task of asking the kinds of questions that get the kind of information people actually want and need.

Tag: journalism
Tag: rhetoric
Tag: politics