TONE AND HABIT

Will jerking around the press hurt Rick Scott?

To pose the question bluntly, will jerking around the Capitol Press Corps really hurt Gov. Rick Scott?

Absolutely.

My own advice to people is to be as accessible as you can, provide as much information as you can, and always return press phone calls before deadline. There are lots of good self-serving reasons for this, but mainly (as someone who started his career as a journalist) it’s because I regard journalists as the Fourth Estate, a voice of the people that is essential to democracy.

Now, about Scott, who told a group of Florida reporters and editors yesterday at the AP Legislative Planning Session that he doesn’t read Florida newspapers.  (He’s not alone BTW – barely a third of the people in this state probably read a newspaper yesterday, according to the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.) He made some attempts to be nice yesterday, but overall appears to be doing his best to corral the press and limit access to his decision-making process, whatever it is.

Will it matter?  Yes, and here are some implications:

• In his inevitable disagreements with the Legislature, Scott loses even more influence.  In contrast to Gov. Scott, the Legislature’s leadership appears to be going out of its way to be open to the press.  Senate President Mike Haridopolos is doing it for obvious reasons – he needs to stay in the media spotlight as much as possible for the next year and a half to win his primary.  House Speaker Dean Cannon appears (at least for now) to be open because he’s a genuinely conscientious public servant.  They’re already sitting on veto-proof majorities, and they’ll have the press as a megaphone to advance their arguments.  Bottom line, the legislators are going to have a much better time telling their stories in the hometown papers, and they’ll win any public opinion battle with this governor.
• Repetition matters, and four years of hostile press is going to take a toll on Scott in the next election.  Scott squeaked into office with horrible approval ratings -- somewhere around 33 percent.  Despite using a self-funded campaign account to outspend his opponent by something like 4 to 1, he did not win a majority, and only beat Alex Sink by 1.2 points. He’ll never drop the baggage of the Columbia/HCA fraud.  Since he’s been elected, he has seemed bent on giving potential opponents even more ammunition to create a potentially damaging narrative – out of touch executive bent on selling state to special interests. I’ve seen it take down elected officials time after time – while one or two negative stories barely dent public opinion, months or years of sustained negative coverage can erode your support and get you unelected.
• You don’t need the press to win an election, but you want the press to help you govern. I can think of a couple examples to illustrate how this works. Scott won his election because he had enough money to “speak directly to voters,” which for him meant ignoring mediators like editorial boards and instead blanketing the state with 30-second spots. President Barack Obama, when he was merely candidate Obama in 2008, was criticized at times for not being accessible to the press, but again used an overwhelming fundraising advantage (and a great ground game) to deliver an unmediated message to voters.  After Election Day, you can’t afford to prop up public opinion with continual advertising.  The only way you can continue to communicate to the 2 million plus people who put you in office, and who are now counting on you to deliver results, is through the mass media.

Don't get me wrong. I think a Twitter town hall is way cool, a great tactic. With the rise of social media, there are more channels than ever to engage the public directly, without the press as an intermediary. Without a doubt, the mainstream media is not as influential as it was even 10 years ago.

But the press is finally catching on to social media too, and I’d still advise a healthy respect for the creativity and commitment  of today’s journalists to continue the old mission to “give voice to the voiceless, and hold the powerful accountable.”

You want them working with you, not against you.

Have courage in 2011

A man down on earth needs our help.

Splendid! Is he sick?

No. Worse. He's discouraged.

-- From “It’s a Wonderful Life,” 1947

I know it’s a holiday, and we’re supposed to be in good cheer, but can we admit that it’s OK to feel a little discouraged?  It’s been a tough year.  Courage is no small thing, and 2011 promises to be another year where we’ll need all the courage we can find. 

You’d have to go back three generations -- to 1940 when national unemployment averaged 14.6 percent – to find a year that has been as bad as this one for working people.  More than 1.1 million people are out of work in Florida, and today’s statewide 12 percent unemployment is about where we were last year around this time.

There are families going without –without food, without medicine, without transportation – and they are still losing ground.  Small business owners are closing the books on 2010 and wondering if they’ll still be in business in a year.

It’s not a coincidence that Christmas comes at our darkest time of year.

The Winter Solstice, the longest and darkest night, happens around this time.  We’re entering the bleak days of mid-winter, a time of famine for our agrarian ancestors.  Maybe that’s why we celebrate the birth of Jesus on Christmas Day, the tentpole for what we all recognize as the spirit of the season.  (The Gospels never actually mention the time of year of the Nativity.)

“It’s a Wonderful Life,” the 1947 movie starring Jimmy Stewart as George Bailey, a broke and depressed family man on Christmas Eve, wasn’t a hit when it was released, but it’s hard to imagine a Christmas without  it now.  On February 12, 1938 (so the story goes) a historian named Philip Van Doren Stern had an idea while he was shaving – a story about a small-town man who contemplates suicide until a guardian angel shows him what life would have been like without him.  Stern tried to write the story, “The Greatest Gift,” for the next five years, and never seemed to get it right until he changed the setting to Christmas.

Frank Capra, the director who adapted Stern’s story, was a Republican who bragged that he never once voted for Franklin Delano Roosevelt, but also a populist whose films were liberal enough to get him summoned before the House Un-American Activities Committee. In Capra’s film the villain, Mr. Potter, becomes a caricature of a greedy banker, but hero George Bailey is a banker too.  The main difference between the two is heart, and maybe what we would today call ethical business practices.

Potter makes his money by fleecing the working people of Bedford Falls.  He’s critical of the Baileys’ lending to low-income buyers, and their forgiveness to people getting behind on their payments.  “What does that get us?” Potter rants, “A discontented, lazy rabble instead of a thrifty working class.”

George replies, “Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about, they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath?”

If you follow politics, you’ll probably hear echoes of recent controversy.

After the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission was established by Congress to look at the causes of the current financial crisis, four Republican members broke ranks and put out a report pinning the blame on policies to increase homeownership among low-income buyers.  (This after apparently voting to exclude the words “Wall Street” and “deregulation” from the report.)

The theme of their renegade report is that, “The unprecedented number of subprime and other weak mortgages in this bubble set it and its effect apart from others in the past.”  The ultimate blame for the collapse and the destruction of millions of jobs is therefore on “declining lending standards.”  As Potter would say, we let too many of the “lazy rabble” buy homes.

Never mind that many people now experiencing the tragedy of foreclosure wouldn’t be in this position if they hadn’t had the unfortunate timing to be home-shopping in the middle of a bubble of speculation.  Or that the financial industry created consumer lending products that obscured the real costs of buying a home while reaping commissions from average folks ill-equipped to unravel all the “terms and conditions.”

I like that at the end of “It’s a Wonderful Life,” Mr. Potter gets away scot free, even with all his bad behavior.

That doesn’t make good guy George any less wonderful.  Because when George Bailey goes to that bridge, an angel doesn’t save him from drowning.  He saves himself by jumping in to save someone else.

That’s Christmas to me.  For at least one day a year, you have the responsibility to be selfless and kind to your fellow man.  And as someone once said, you should do your best to honor Christmas in your heart and keep it all the year.

What you need, and why you need it now

If there is a book for communications professionals to read in 2009, and read again and again, it is Peggy Noonan’s Patriotic Grace: What It Is and Why We Need It Now. “Being able to persuade, to explain, to elucidate, and to lead truthfully, matters,” Noonan writes, and bless her for reminding us.

Noonan’s book, published before the outcome of the 2008 election had been decided, is an argument for greater unity in a nation that is facing turmoil.  It’s a call for calm, wisdom and maturity, and a roadmap for credible and effective governance.

 

We’ll be inaugurating a new president soon, and he’ll be leading a nation that is still divided in thought and spirit.  I’ll be learning from what he says and how he says it, because the content and manner of his communication will inspire many to heroism, just as it will infuriate many others.

 

Watch the effects on people, and make note of the emotional triggers for their varied reactions, because there will be lessons for you in how you communicate in similar situations.  We’re not all responsible for leading a nation, but your business, city or neighborhood can be just as divided and difficult.  The simple lesson, too often forgotten:  we are stronger when we work together.

 

Noonan writes, “So:  we have much to do.  And it all starts with a greater civility, a greater respect, both a higher – and deeper – tone to our political conversation.”

 

We can start today.

Will you buy my mongolian cow sour yogurt, comrade?

If, like me, you'd be fascinated by an examination of "how advertising appropriates a dominant anti-consumerist political ideology to promote consumption within China’s social and political transition,” then by all means click this link to Science Daily.

A couple of researchers looking at advertisements in the People’s Daily, China's largest daily newspaper, noted the ways that advertisers have co-opted communist symbols and messages, such as red stars and red flags, to promote color TVs, refrigerators, and everything else under the sun.

Using patriotic symbols to help sell stuff isn't exactly revolutionary (get it?), but this is an appreciable irony: Communist political propaganda being harnessed to fuel the transition to a consumer culture, itself part of a socialist strategy to modernize the world's largest economy.

Aside from that, I learned about the Mongolia Cow Sour Yogurt Super Girls.  Coming soon to Publix, we hope.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080717092100.htm

Local candidates have the power to inspire us

Spring in Tallahassee is the season of cynicism, especially in an election year. Almost immediately after the end of Florida's 60-day Legislative session — a little before, some would say — the campaigns for re-election begin. This can make a person skeptical of the debates playing out under the domes of the House and Senate chambers.

Monday night, however, you might have found a partial remedy for the cynicism that infects many in the political arena. City Hall was hosting a candidate forum, and many of those who spoke were running for their first office. Their speeches were, simply, heartening. Yes, they were sometimes amateurish. But in this time and place, where chilly calculation too often prevails, the unpracticed delivery only made them more heartwarming.

Some speakers were scripted; some were not. Some had professional support; some were flying solo. There were a couple who were clearly quaking in their shoes as they faced a room of fellow citizens, straining to express in words what they so deeply felt about the path of our city, our state and our nation.

It's not easy. I admired them, each and every one, for their courage, for doing one of the most difficult things any person can attempt: getting up in front of an impassive group of your fellows and trying to motivate them. That may be the most elusive skill in all of human endeavor.

Many of the candidates spoke about what they no doubt thought was expected — the FCAT, state workers, the environment, the usual parade of endorsements — but there were often unexpected and transcendent moments. Was anyone else paying attention when one candidate asked, quite sincerely, "Please give me a chance to serve this country that has done so much for me"? I know he meant it, and I felt it. That, my friends, is a love of America that simply cannot be mocked.

I was also a little sad, because I knew what would await the winners. It is a tough world. Their real education will come later, when they are inevitably caught in the pincers of public opinion. One day, they will have to vote on a tough issue, and they will be lobbied by good friends, each on opposite sides of the issue. No middle ground will seem available, and no bipartisanship. Then, perhaps, they will learn to dodge, to bob and to weave.

In politics, fiercely held opinions become fiercely held liabilities — fixed targets for the broadsides coming in the mail, on radio and in the 30-second TV spots. If they go far enough, if they rise high enough, then the stakes will become more personal. They will be in the company of people who play hardball, and every action past and present will be scrutinized. Some will become fighters, and some will decide that it is not worth the toll — and the pain.

Maybe that is why we too often view the political process with a jaded eye. Playing politics for any length of time can affect the psyche in about the same way as reading too much Nietzsche, and too much of that isn't good for anyone. After a while, you expect to be manipulated and coerced. You just don't expect to be inspired.

But they are all good people, these candidates. I imagined what it might be like if tomorrow the great engines of civilization began to seize up. What if the formal assemblies of states and nations began to dissolve, and the human race withdrew back into the small tribes that were our first governments. These are the men and women who would ask to lead us, taking charge not by force of arms, but simply by promising that our lights will stay on and our garbage will be taken away. They seemed, to a sentimental eye, to be faithful public servants, one and all. Let's give them a hand.