Obama: Overexposed?

Are President Obama’s declining poll numbers on his handling of the economy a result of overexposure?

Earlier, I, too, argued that the President is grossly over-exposed in the media. I am beginning to rethink that traditional take. As in social media and so many other venues, Mr. Obama is rewriting the rules. For this year, at least, he is gambling that his omnipresent exposure is the best way to transform his personal popularity into spendable political capital. So far, judging by most of his ratings and some early successes, it is working.

Why, then, a decline in the numbers of his handling of the economy? Below is a chart from The Washington Post. As this reality sinks in, the president’s overall numbers will sink as well. Beyond rhetorical blandishments, he will need a substantive response.

gr2009061400153

Is Obama overexposed?

Over at NewMajority.com, a self-described PR professional named Crystal Wright reviews three problems she sees with President Obama’s PR record while in office.  Here’s a sample:

The president’s single biggest PR mistake is his over-exposure in the media. When anyone talks too much, president or celebrity, people just get tired of listening to that person. President Obama seems to be falling victim to this rule, with the most recent Gallup finding disapproval of his handling of the economy rising to 42%.

Setting aside her closing comments on the Egypt speech, which we’ve discussed here already, what is your take of the overexposure claim?  Or Wright’s other argument, that Obama is striving to do too many big things at once, at least in his rhetoric.

A Good Day for Women and Girls

img-article-page-brown-clinton-palin-verveer_232431495818Last week, I had the pleasure of attending Melanne Verveer’s the swearing-in ceremony as our first-ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues.  It was a lovely occasion — full of both rejoicing and resolve, as Secretary Clinton and her newest ambassador reaffirmed their commitment to “make sure that the concerns of women and girls remain central to the American foreign policy agenda.”

Both the Secretary and Ambassador Verveer gave moving, funny, meaningful remarks.  Here’s an excerpt from the Secretary — a nice illustration of how to use humor, including self-deprecation, to pay tribute without seeming obsequious:

Now, you might think that this was a really easy choice for me. (Laughter.) Now, Melanne is famous for her rolodex, which at last count had more than 6,000 names. (Laughter.) She has traveled to 80-plus countries and has conducted personal conversations with every woman leader, entrepreneur, activist, and advocate in every one of those countries, thereby adding more names to her rolodex. (Laughter.)

She speaks several difficult languages. During our White House days together, Melanne single-handedly elevated U.S. foreign policy by delivering a speech in its entirety in Ukraine in Ukrainian. (Applause.)

So why hesitate about this appointment at all? Well, I had to figure out how I was going to keep up with her. (Laughter.) Melanne has been, like all the rest of you, telling me what to do for years.

And those of us who know and love her, I think, would agree that she is famous for several things: Not just the mischievous and amused chuckle with which she greets the latest item of gossip; not just the maternal pride and protection she lavishes on those who work with and for her; not just the fierce negotiating skills – always applied with disarming charm and humor – that can make even grown men wither in the face of her reasonable demands; and not just her work habits, which, so far as I can tell, are 24/7, having traveled with her many, many miles and finally just giving up and having to find sleep, and watching Melanne plow through the bags of paper that she would carry with her everywhere; and not just her brilliant, beautiful, talented, delightful and all together perfect children and grandchildren – (laughter) – not just her devoted, good-natured, ever-patient husband Phil – (applause) – and by the way, he figured the only opportunity he would have to get to actually see Melanne was by taking a job here as well. (Laughter.)

But Melanne is most famous for the unwavering passion she brings to her causes. And for the last 15 years, that cause has been women and girls; their rights, their opportunities, their central important to the future of our world’s progress and prosperity.

For a more gossipy description of the ceremony itself, check out Karen Murphy in the Examiner… and here, Tina Brown suggests Sarah Palin could benefit from Secretary Clinton’s example.

Leadership Communications is about the Future — Mostly

Today’s New York Times includes an article about Republican leaders who say the party needs to move beyond the invocation of Ronald Reagan.  I largely agree.

In the 2008 campaign, every GOP candidate sought to capture the mantle of Ronald Reagan.  The result was a field that occasionally seemed focused on returning to the past rather than advancing on the future.  And for all of American history, campaigns that turned backwards have been losing campaigns.  American politics has always been about the future.

The same is true for leadership of all kinds, at least in the United States.  Yes, use the past to illuminate the present and to invoke enduring values.  But in speeches, op-eds, and interviews, no leaders should be engaged in a remembrance of days gone by for its own sake.  The task of leadership is to define a future worth having and to motivate followers to reach for it.

It is the task before the GOP.  Reagan clarified for Republicans, at least, the value of freedom in global political affairs and the strategy of entrepreneurially driven growth in global economic affairs.  Those values endure.  But they endure whether Mr. Reagan’s name is invoked or not.

Commencement Conclusions

We’re nearing the end of commencement season, and reviews are rolling in.  Fletcher Dean offers up his faves and flops on Ragan.com; Joe Biden and Tom Brokaw get big props, along with environmentalist Paul Hawken, but he thinks Ellen DeGeneres missed in her appearance at Tulane.

I admit, I cringed at the same section of Ellen’s speech that Fletcher highlights, but overall I thought it was good.  Clearly the audience did too.  And since there always seem to be fewer female speakers in the spotlight, I was glad to see a woman make Fletcher’s list at all.

So here are ten terrific commencement speeches by women leaders over the years — political figures, CEOs, entertainers, academics, and more:

Meryl Streep, Vassar College, 1983

Barbara Bush, Wellesley College, 1990

Gloria Steinem, Tufts University, 1997

Anna Quindlen, Mount Holyoke College, 1999

Carly Fiorina, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, 2005

Melissa Etheridge, Berklee School of Music, 2006

Oprah Winfrey, Stanford University, 2008

Margaret Edson, Smith College, 2008

Michelle Obama, UC Merced, 2009.  (Check out the student video that got the First Lady to come to Merced in the first place.)

And who could forget these words to the graduates, which were NOT delivered by Kurt Vonnegut, but rather appeared as a column by Chicago Trib writer Mary Schmich:

Wear Sunscreen!

WTF, Chuck?

As people who use words — full words, often in complete sentences — to communicate, it’s easy for speechwriters to seem a little behind the times when it comes to new-fangled technology like the Twitter. 140 characters? Speechwriters can barely say hello in 140 characters.

And while I recognize the communications benefits of Twitter — reaching the kids with their cellular phones and whatnot — I don’t think it’s too much to expect certain people, United States senators for instance, to exhibit a respect for language in their discourse, even when it’s brief discourse.

Which is why it was discouraging to see 75 year old senator Chuck Grassley apparently lose his mind this weekend — sorry, WKEND — on Twitter.

According to the Associated Press, Grassley had his boxers in a bind over the president’s in absentia call for Congress to get cracking on health care reform. So he took to the Twitter box. And here’s what he came up with:

“Pres Obama you got nerve while u sightseeing in Paris to tell us ‘time to deliver’ on health care. We still on skedul/even workinWKEND.”

Read More »

D-Day Orations — Lessons in the Large and the Small

The leaders of France, Canada, the UK and the US  have just finished back-to-back orations at the D-Day commemorative ceremonies.  We have witnessed many such anniversary observances over the years — every one moving, not simply for what has been said there, in Normandy, but far more for what so many did there, all those years ago.

Today, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was by far the most eloquent and most appropriate, at least to this American’s ear.  More purely than the others, he captured the transcendent significance of the moment — the legacy of sacrifice for an enduring cause that ennobled and continues to ennoble the world.  At stake was something larger than one country, one moment, one fight, something beyond time and place, something on which all of time would turn, and he captured that.

The others were good, though each with an ever so slightly bemusing touch of the parochial.  Was a ceremony marking heroic exertions made in alliance with Britain really the right occasion for a US president to invoke Lexington and Concord?  And didn’t the soldiers of all the countries engaged that day, not just Canadians (the only focus of the Canadian PM’s account of the post-war era), return home to build, not just a better country, but a better world?  And didn’t the men who hit the beaches in 1944 fight for something beyond national vengeance and personal survival, though from the repeated references in the French president’s remarks you might have thought otherwise?

Given the grandeur of the hour, these are quibbles.  But isn’t a pundit’s job to quibble?

Perhaps the most eloquent moment of the afternoon came not in words but in notes, the poignant sounding of taps over the headstones of the fallen, overlooking the beaches and fields where they had commenced the re-conquest of the continent, leading to, in the decades since, the greatest advance of human freedom and dignity in all history.

Friday Round Up

Thanks to Mark for his post on the President’s speech in Cairo, which I agree was terrific.  I was also impressed by the forethought the White House gave to the speech’s distribution; same-day versions were available in Arabic, Chinese, Dari, French, Hebrew, Hindi, Indonesian, Malay, Pashto, Persian, Punjabi, Russian, Turkish, and Urdu — which means that either Ben Rhodes and co. put the draft to bed well in advance, or the translators were working all night!

Via Twitter, Queen Rania of Jordan deemed the speech “genuine and thoughtful.”   A more ambivalent selection of regional reactions can be found here.  Most seem to agree, as the President eloquently acknowledged, that:

recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task.  Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people.  These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

And on a totally different subject, but just in case you missed it, Garry Trudeau turned his comic strip pen on commencement speakers this week.  You might call it, “Doones Lampoons Ki-Moon.”

Obama in Cairo: An Apology Tour?

President Obama’s speech in Cairo elicited a whirlwind of accusations from my fellow conservatives, many of whom have labeled it an “apology tour.” Marc Thiessen, former George W. Bush speechwriter, said on Fox News that the president had thrown “our military under the bus in front of a Muslim audience.”

When it comes to opportunities for criticism, the agenda of the Obama Administration presents conservatives with a target-rich environment. But Obama’s Cairo speech should only be a target for praise.

Yes, the president did admit–as the U.S. government has done before–interference in the politics of Iran in the 1950s. Yes, the president represented his views on Iraq which, like them or not, were clearly presented to the American people in the last election. But he did not come, as Jimmy Carter might have done, on bended knee. He presented America as an imperfect country that is in a state of continual reform. In short, an example to follow.

The president said the “United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known.” Sound like an apology to you?

For the sake of a little humility, President Obama won the right to gain the attention of the entire Muslim world and to utter truths that needed to be said.

To elites in Cairo, where the government-sanctioned press routinely publishes cartoons riddled with the crudest, vilest anti-Semitic images, the president linked anti-Semitism to the Holocaust.

To young Iranians, preparing to choose whether or not to re-elect the rancid Ahmadinejad, the president called Holocaust denial a sign of one who is “baseless,” “ignorant” and “hateful.”

To young people tempted by the rhetoric of Al-Qaida, the president (with the authority of one with Muslim roots) used a stirring quote from the Quran to drive a wedge between Al-Qaida and Islam.

To the governments of the region, the president spoke against rulers who “steal from the people.” He made it clear that true democracy has to be more than just elections.

To several kingdoms, he called for religious freedom, shaming their regimes by comparing them to the relative tolerance of Andalusia and Cordoba.

And he stood up for that half of the Muslim world that is often forced into silence. He spoke up for the education of girls and said that no one should dictate “what clothes a Muslim woman should wear.”

At home, these may sound like platitudes. Spoken by President Barack Obama in Cairo, these words, according to news reports, caused people in the audience to gasp.

When I think of this speech, I think back to President Reagan’s speech before the Berlin Wall. Some of President Reagan’s foreign policy advisors told him there were certain things he couldn’t say. Ronald Reagan went ahead and said them.

So did Barack Obama. This may be the most consequential speech since “tear down this wall.”

The ABCs (and TARPs) of Governing

Today’s Wall Street Journal takes a humorous look at the proliferation of acronyms in stimulus-era Washington. They include the ugly (RAT Board), odd (LUST Trust), and potentially profane (FCCCER). But the Commerce Department (AKA DOC) takes the cake:

Some government departments have described their stimulus plans almost entirely in acronyms, such as the Department of Commerce, which listed its recovery act appropriations in a weekly report as: “NIST CRF, NIST STRS, NIST Health IT, NOAA PAC, NOAA ORF, NTIA DTACBP, NTIA BTOP, EDA EDAP, EDA S&E, Census PCP.”

DOC’s response: “We are already providing the public with an unprecedented level of information about their tax dollars at work under the Recovery Act and are continuously working to strengthen that direct communication with the American people.”

LOL.

The Problem with Good Press

Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson today asks a question vexing conservatives: “Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage [as President Obama has]?”

His answer: no – and that’s not healthy.

Samuelson points to a new Pew study that attaches some numbers to the sense of coziness between the Administration and the major media. The upshot: President Obama is getting much more favorable coverage at this stage of his Administration than either President Bush or President Clinton received.

(For light-hearted proof, see this piece in The Onion.)

Samuelson suggests reasons why: “Most journalists like Obama; they admire his command of language; he’s a relief after Bush; they agree with his agenda (so it never occurs to them to question basic premises); and they don’t want to see the first African American president fail.”

All probably correct to one extent or another. But I would place particular weight on Read More »

Sound Bites Versus Truth

Editor’s Note: Today’s guest post is by Tom Daly, editor of Vital Speeches of the Day.

I was recently made aware by way of an excellent speech in the June issue of Vital Speeches of the Day, that we are slowly but surely leaving the sound bite era. The speech was by former George H.W. Bush speechwriter, Joseph Duggan.  With social media networks like YouTube entire speeches are available online the moment they are given. This is especially true with speeches given by high profile people. However, what amazes me the most is that political pundits from either side of the aisle never miss the opportunity to pick apart a speech or writing to try and discredit someone to help their political agenda.

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

This phrase in particular is being passed around by people like Hannity, Limbaugh and other right wing Republican supporters. It is being used as evidence to prove that President Obama’s appointee for the Supreme Court of the United State, Judge Sonia Sotomayor is too biased and maybe even too racist to make a fair justice. You might interpret that from this phrase alone. But, if you read the speech in its entirety all she was trying to say was that her Latino heritage and upbringing gives her a perspective that would not only help but maybe even enhance her ability to be a better judge. The main point of this speech and the conference it was presented to was to encourage other law professionals to use their personal backgrounds, to achieve more success for themselves as minorities in general.

Is that racist?
Read More »

Economy of Words

I heard a story this morning on NPR in which listeners had been invited to submit recession-inspired haikus.  Some were heartbreaking; others darkly hilarious.

All in seventeen syllables.

It got me thinking about the economy of words — and how the best speechwriters make every sentence as meaningful and muscular as possible, given the limited amount of information any audience can absorb.

I shared some of these musings with the multi-talented David Litt, a recent addition to our team at West Wing Writers, and he responded with the stanzas below, which I hope readers will enjoy as much as I did.

“Girl you are so fine,
I made you dinner myself.
Mmm … Ramen Noodles.”
– A “Recession Haiku” from NPR’s Planet Money podcast.

A contest challenge.
NPR’s “Planet Money.”
Econ-themed haiku, please.

Readers sent them in.
It must have struck quite a chord.
Over two-hundred.

(A link to favorites.)
I sit at my desk and think:
“Why so popular?”

Here, a shameless plug
For Haikudetat.com
A friend’s website.

This is what I like:
Beginning, middle, and end.
In only three seconds.

And, as belts tighten
Writing should not be immune.
A thriftier form.

Talk is/remains cheap,
Like leverage, pre-bubble burst.
Can Haiku save us?

Good communicators use empathy

Below, you will see the guest post from Philip Murphy, communications chief of a Fortune 100 company.  I don’t know Mr. Murphy, and I am not sure I remember which company employs him, but I heartily endorse what he has to say.

Writing well requires clarity of thought.  Expressing thoughts clearly, working through their implications — as every accomplished writer must — is an essential precursor to effective action.  All the contributors to this blog learned that lesson early in their careers.

The American presidents for whom they worked — both Republican and Democrat — had learned it, too.  I know some on each side of the aisle will find crediting a president of the other side with intelligence and clarity as wrongheaded, but I’ve seen enough of all these men close up to say with confidence that it is so.

Effective writing requires other qualities, too, including a now suddenly controversial term, empathy.  You may or may not feel empathy is essential in a Supreme Court justice, whose principal job is the impartial application of the Constitution.  But it is clearly central for the rest of us, particularly those in politics and business.  Communications involves two parties, the listener as well as the speaker.  And if the speaker doesn’t keep the listener in mind, he or she will be speaking to no one.

In any event, bravo to Mr. Murphy.  I hope we see other guest posts from him in the months to come.

Start Binging June 3rd

In the headline, “binging” should be read to rhyme with “ringing,” not “cringing” – as in, making use of Microsoft’s new competitor to Google. It debuts next Wednesday (for some reason).

Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer told the Wall Street Journal that Bing was chosen as the name for the new search engine because it “works globally [and] doesn’t have negative connotations.”

True enough. “Bing” makes me think of Bing cherries, Bing Crosby, Chandler Bing, and ba-da-bing — all positives.  As a stand-alone it reminds me of a cross between “Boing!” and Southwest Airlines’ “Ding!” – both of which have a certain “come to attention” quality. So I guess that works with search.

In an early review, CNET gives Bing high marks for its ability to refine information and make it more immediately useful – as opposed to Google’s listier format. Read More »