Tag Archives: election

Trump vs. the Press: A losing media strategy

Farr Marketing Group is apolitical. We don’t endorse or criticize political candidates.  But I found it interesting when presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump held a news conference to showcase the funds he said he raised for veterans.

Into the presser, it was clear that while he listed the veterans’ charities that he said received $5.6 million in donations due to his efforts, the real purpose of the news conference was to lambast the news media for their coverage of him and his campaign.  Most presidents have a love/hate relationship with the news media.  They love receiving credit when credit is due, and hate being criticized when things go wrong.  Most people are the same, it’s just that when it comes to the president, the stakes are much higher.

Donald Trump obviously doesn’t like being criticized and he made it very clear “game on” in his press battle.  For most of his career he has shot back at anybody and everybody who dare offer a critical word of him.  So this is nothing new.  The issue is that he is running for president and being at war with the media is not a very smart strategy for a successful presidency (if it comes to that).

It’s hard to image presidential-media relations at a lower point than during Richard Nixon’s Watergate era tenure.  When Watergate was the only thing the press wrote about, regardless of what Nixon did, he almost had a public breakdown.  It was out front and personal when Nixon was filmed pushing press secretary Ron Ziegler towards the media at a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention, implying Ziegler needed to get rid of them.  I remember seeing the footage as a journalism student and feeling sorry for the humiliation Ziegler endured.

Trump seems to have thicker skin and more experience dishing it out and taking it.  But if the ultimate goal of a president is to get his/her agenda through congress and approval by the American public, then being at war with the media is not the way to do it.  They will just hate everything he does, because his presidency is no longer about policy.  It’s personal.

Love or hate Trump, it’s clear he is not stupid.  And his “let the chips fall where they may” attitude seems to be working for his candidacy.

Our firm is not advising the Trump campaign.  But if we were, we’d suggest that Donald Trump, who seems to not take advice for anyone, take a look down the road should he become president.

To be hammered day in and day out, minute in and minute out by the press, is not a smart presidential strategy.

 

When the media tries to become the story

The CNBC-hosted Republican debate turned into a debacle.  From the first question, it was clear that CNBC didn’t want to be the conduit of information for the candidates.  They wanted to insert themselves into the debate by asking ridiculous, mean-spirited and mostly irrelevant questions.

Candidate Ted Cruz, after several questions, took them to task and received loud audience approval.  He blasted the questioners for wanting to turn a civil debate into a “cage fight.”

This post has nothing to do with politics.  It has to do with money.  Since Donald Trump entered the race, the Republican debates have earned Fox, CNN and now CNBC big ratings.  And big ratings translate into big ad revenue.

It was no accident that CNBC asked the questions they asked.  They wanted the “debate” to be as bloody as it possibly could.  They wanted to turn it into a reality show that is talked about and YouTubed over and over.  And by doing so pump up the ratings.

The question is: what is the role of a news organization that hosts an election debate?  Are they supposed to ask meaningful questions that allow each candidate to state his/her positions on important issues, or is the media’s role to grab as many eyeballs as possible for its own bottom line?

The historic 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debate, which cemented John Kennedy’s election, was the first televised presidential debate.  But it was not an exercise in who could mess up the most.  CBS took its role as a news organization seriously and allowed each candidate to talk about the issues, not about their personalities, short-comings, poll ratings and everything else that had nothing to do with being president.

But, unfortunately, that time may have come and gone.  Today news organizations are profit centers and they cherish the opportunity to host election debates because they make money, especially if there are fireworks.

And if it takes a network like CNBC to flame the fires, well, so be it.

On the other hand, the fall-out from the CNBC was so pronounced and embarrassing that future primary and then election debates may actually do what they are supposed to — showcase the candidates qualifications for the most powerful job on earth.

Let’s see if that is the case.