Talk Hosts SWQUAK about not landing Presidential Candidates for interviews.

[MC]

Hannity and Inghram complained they could not get Romney on. He went on Hugh "who" Hewitt show for 3 minutes. I know Obama is going on the FM music stations.

Doesn't seem like the candidates at the National level like talk radio.

 

[w9wi]

I might imagine the candidates feel appearing on talk radio would be a waste of time and a danger...

Most talk shows are openly conservative, as are their audiences. To that end:

- For Romney: there is really no upside. Pretty much the entire audience of these shows is already planning on voting for him; there is little chance of reaching anyone who's undecided or might be convinced to abandon Obama in Romney's favor.

There is however a potential downside: working with questions his staff may not have thoroughly studied, he might give an answer which the Obama campaign can use against him.

- For Obama: there is really no upside. Pretty much the entire audience of these shows is already planning on voting for Romney; there is little chance of reaching anyone who's undecided or might be convinced to abandon Romney in Obama's favor.

There is however a potential downside: working with questions his staff may not have thoroughly studied, he might give an answer which the Romney campaign can use against him.

(note the symmetry )


I think they'd both be well-served to go on music-format radio. That's where the undecideds and those who haven't decided whether they'll vote at all can be found.

 

[johnbasalla]

I too believe that the candidates should go on music stations, probably best in AMD and PMD. Gov. Romney should use his appearance at the NAACP forum as the starting point of going to venues where it would be assumed that the President has them in his hip-pocket, so to speak. On radio, he should offer to do appearances on Urban radio shows. He probably won't get the majority of votes from that audience, but his messaging will change some people's minds. Additionally, by going on these shows, the hosts won't be able to use the oft-used narrative that he doesn't care about minorities, and only in it for the 'fat-cats'.

 

[recto101]

How about have the candidates go all-news radio in some markets and get interviewed by the anchor of that station. Will that work?

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

He probably won't get the majority of votes from that audience, but his messaging will change some people's minds. Additionally, by going on these shows, the hosts won't be able to use the oft-used narrative that he doesn't care about minorities, and only in it for the 'fat-cats'.

I assume what you are saying is that because he shows up at a station programming to the minority audience, the urban audience, that alone proves he has their interests at heart and there is nothing further to say or ask. His appearance speaks for itself.

Try this scenario. Romney shows up at such a station and after a few pleasant exchanges and an opportunity for Mr. Romney to express what he feels are his strongest ties to the audience. So far so good. Here is what the campaign advisors have to think about before they agree to such an event.

What happens when the host of the show, the news person assigned to do the interview comes up with questions like this:

(1) Your party is doing a lot of things to make it harder to vote this year. That worries my audience. What are you doing to reverse that trend?

(2) Black women tend to live in communities where healthcare availabilities are lacking. Your party if doing a lot of things to make it harder for women's healthcare delivery. What are you doing to reverse that trend?

I could probably list another handful of such questions that could result in answers that end up in Democratic campaign ads.

If you were on the Romney campaign staff.... would you risk such questions?

No matter what the venue, no matter what the target audience, the further down the media food-chain you go, the more likely you are to be dealing with a host or question-asker who will be more pointed, maybe more rude than the usual treatment received when working with the top-tier nation people on the Sunday morning TV shows like Meet the Press, etc.

 

[johnbasalla]

You are correct that it won't always be easy, but it's either that or often Romney's views won't be given a fair hearing. Both candidates should be ready for the tough questions. A candidate goes on a AMD or PMD show, whether national or local, I think it would likely be the host(s) of the show would do the interviewing.
There is a bit of stepping into the unknown going on music driven shows, where the hosts aren't political-wonks.
I remember in 2008 Michelle Obama went on the Clear Channel CHR WAKS Akron/Cleveland and talked to "Java Joel" the live evening entertainer. He was asking her about freedom of speech for DJ's and the FCC, hardly a hot-button topic during that campaign.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

You are correct that it won't always be easy, but it's either that or often Romney's views won't be given a fair hearing. Both candidates should be ready for the tough questions.

I don't want to read more into what you said than is really there.... but you make it appear that Romney will not be given a fair hearing, while Obama will always get a fair hearing. I'm not sure that is the case.

And I'm not sure that going on a show that is hosted by a "political wonk" is any assurance that one will be treated more fairly than by some host who is out in la-la land when it comes to political issues. The voting public is NOT made up of primarily "political wonks". we could probably have a stand alone thread discussing whether the voting masses come away from a show hosted by a political wonk with an understanding of the issues... and the ability to figure out which candidate will best serve that "member of the voting mass".

For the first time in my life I feel like I have the luxury of enough time to dabble in the political scene at the local lelvel. I'm not impressed that the people who attend party meetings at the local level understand what they claim to support. I watch as Republicans rant for some issue that is not close to being conservative, and as Democrats rant for some issue that is not close to being on the liberal agenda. I'm not sure whether it matters whether the host of a show interviewing a candidate understands the dynamics of the campaigns. The audience probably won't get the message anyway.

 

[FreddyE1977]

He probably won't get the majority of votes from that audience, but his messaging will change some people's minds. Additionally, by going on these shows, the hosts won't be able to use the oft-used narrative that he doesn't care about minorities, and only in it for the 'fat-cats'.

I assume what you are saying is that because he shows up at a station programming to the minority audience, the urban audience, that alone proves he has their interests at heart and there is nothing further to say or ask. His appearance speaks for itself.

Try this scenario. Romney shows up at such a station and after a few pleasant exchanges and an opportunity for Mr. Romney to express what he feels are his strongest ties to the audience. So far so good. Here is what the campaign advisors have to think about before they agree to such an event.

What happens when the host of the show, the news person assigned to do the interview comes up with questions like this:

(1) Your party is doing a lot of things to make it harder to vote this year. That worries my audience. What are you doing to reverse that trend?

(2) Black women tend to live in communities where healthcare availabilities are lacking. Your party if doing a lot of things to make it harder for women's healthcare delivery. What are you doing to reverse that trend?

I could probably list another handful of such questions that could result in answers that end up in Democratic campaign ads.

If you were on the Romney campaign staff.... would you risk such questions?

No matter what the venue, no matter what the target audience, the further down the media food-chain you go, the more likely you are to be dealing with a host or question-asker who will be more pointed, maybe more rude than the usual treatment received when working with the top-tier nation people on the Sunday morning TV shows like Meet the Press, etc.

Except that they take TV interviews all the time from hosts who are just as apt to ask
troublesome questions.

 

[MC]

I heard some of the local radio news people interview candidates in the past...but not recently. You may have some radio person ask some crazy question...Hugh Hewitt ? miht as well go on a college campus radio station,

 

[fmradio1]

There's a couple of reasons the major candidates aren't utilizing radio this time around.

First off, there's not a lot of political ads on the radio at the national level, not like in previous presidential campaigns. Local and state races are a different story, but even in the swing states, the candidates are doing more TV and internet than radio. There's the occasional local host in a swing state that may score an interview, but outside of Rush, the b-team of national conservatalkers have largely been shut out. Why? Talk radio has become so hyper-conservative over the years (and demographically limited), it's kind of a waste of time going on the national shows. Many of the bigger hosts didn't even support Romney during the primaries. Why would Mitt want to cater to them now? It's not like he's going to win anyone over. There's not a lot of undecideds in the talk radio audience. There are better venues for the candidates to be spending their time.

As far as the Democrats go, the President, as has been mentioned, is doing Urban radio appearances both at the local level, and with some of the major syndicated morning shows like he did last time around. But, he knows it's going to be a friendly venue, and won't get the pointed questions the way Romney might if he did the conservative talk circuit.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

On conservative talk shows, as was mentioned many if not all of the national conservative hosts really didn't back him during the primaries, as they tend to be more further to the right than Mr. Romney. So yes, NOW they support him, because its Mitt or "Little Barry" as Limbaugh calls Barack. But as I've heard many TEA party folks say, Mitt's not conservative enough for their tastes, but given the choice, they'll vote for Romney rather than sit home not voting and have Obama win.

I've listened to the Laura Ingraham Show a number of times and have heard her interview folks like Newt Gingrich during the primaries and to her credit, she doesn't just lob softball questions. Where she doesn't agree with Newt on issues, she'd challenge him and offered a rather tough at times interview, yet she showed respect for the former Speaker of the House. So this is probably why Mitt Romney won't give Ms. Ingraham an interview, he's got enough problems without Laura pointing them out to her listeners as she's pretty conservative and might have some tough questions to ask the former Gov. of Mass.

Would Romney be treated fairly on Letterman? Probably not. It was obvious from watching Obama's visit to Letterman that the TV host is a solid supporter of Barry and the DEMS.

The one radio place where Mitt Romney and Barack Obama might get an even handed interview would be on NPR. I realize that a majority of the folks who work at NPR are DEMS, but NPR since the beginning of the Iraq War has worked hard at being far more balanced in their NEWS reporting (not commentary or opinion shows) than any of the cable networks. I listen quite often to NPR and noted the balanced reporting back during the Iraq War, where they gave even handed interviews to Generals, GOP Senators, etc, just as they did with DEM Senators and folks who might have been against Bush's war. I've not noticed any change in the years since.

 

[MC]

Hewitt gets Romney Ryan interviews, but who is listening? Inghram does ask tough questions.