Author: Jim Eltringham

Political consultant specializing in grassroots mobilization, online media, and public relations.

Beck vs. O’Keefe

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Glenn Beck was almost immediate in his criticism of James O’Keefe’s latest video adventure, and the media is picking up on it this week:

“The problem with this whole thing is does James O’Keefe have enough credibility to continue to do” undercover video journalism? Beck asked his listeners. That kind of journalism, he said, is “just really not something that you necessarily want to get into.

Beck, of course, is a media trailblazer himself, who rose to national prominence through his revolutionary and original radio program.  He created a similarly original television program and online magazine.

With others from the right falling all over each other with admiration for O’Keefe’s NPR sting, Beck stands out as a rare dissenting voice.

But more than that, O’Keefe’s brand of activist journalism is simply more interesting than Beck’s platitudes from behind a microphone.  For months, critics have been crowing about Beck’s flagging ratings.  O’Keefe is a threat to Beck from a pure business standpoint.

After all, if you were Fox News, what would be more likely to get ratings – Glenn Beck’s chalkboard with notes about the GDP or James O’Keefe sending someone with a hidden camera into a government office?

Results don’t lie

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

My latest post over at Pundit League talks about the Obama White House’s attempt to shift the focus on budget debates from the money to the benefits.  This month, they’re talking about education as a sacred cow; future budget battles are sure to treat other programs similarly.  As difficult as budgets are, it’s still a tough sell to cut back on government programs everyone is used to.

But what if those programs, for lack of a better-refined and focus-group-tested term, suck?  That reality may be the best arrow in any small government Robin Hood’s quiver.

The Heritage Foundation points out that a boom in education spending has not bought higher performance in America’s public schools.  Thomas Sowell made a similar point this week, when he wrote about the allegedly ecologically friendly policies of urban liberals in San Francisco pricing low- and middle-class blacks out of the city.  Private unions – who represent workers who actually have to worry about their jobs – are concerned that the EPA would cause layoffs from companies forced to spend extra complying with extraneous regulations.

For each of these programs and others like them, there’s always talk about the benefits.  But as Speaker Boehner said this week, “Talk is cheap.”

Getting O’Keefed is more than just a camera trick

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

James O’Keefe will be lauded on the right this week for forcing the resignation of NPR’s CEO; you’ll hear talk about how creative and bold he is to go undercover with hidden cameras to expose left-wing organizations in their own words.  It actually isn’t that simple, though:  O’Keefe does more than simple hide cameras and wait for people to say dumb things.  This week, for example, O’Keefe released his initial video on Tuesday – the one where a former NPR staffer demonstrates outright hostility toward tea partiers and the conservative movement.  It appeared to be a basic case of organizational media bias, though it could have been explained away as a donor relations executive saying whatever he could to raise a donation.

Then came the second video yesterday – where another NPR official discusses ways to “hide” donations from a fictional Muslim Brotherhood front group.  This is much more damning; and combined with the other one creates the perception of a trend.  At the very least, it kept a one-day story going for multiple days.

Erstwhile CEO Vivian Schiller didn’t make it to the second video; in the 48 hours between the releases she resigned.  Jon Stewart couldn’t believe NPR didn’t fight back.  But maybe NPR had been paying attention to O’Keefe’s history of takedowns.

ACORN didn’t collapse under the weight of a single video; O’Keefe released several over time to keep the issue alive through several news cycles.  The same happened with his expose of the teachers unions in New Jersey and other work his organization, Project Veritas, have undertaken.

Rather than try to bash O’Keefe’s reporting, NPR allies have been quick to decry the comments heard on the tapes.  That’s significant – not only do they recognize what what was said was bad, they know that there may be even more to come.

Like Newt himself, this is better in theory

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

My Tuesday post at Pundit League this week (which was actually a Thursday post due to my own fault) discusses the mockery that is the system of campaign finance laws, and how Presidential candidates are often candidates long before they run.  One example of a such a candidate is Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich, who flubbed his announcement-that-there-will-be-an-announcement-about-an-announcement last week, isn’t officially running yet, but has decided that his campaign will commence at Independence Hall in Philadelphia.

No one can argue with the symbolism of the locale.  If Pennsylvania is a blue state, then it is the Philly region that makes it so; yet the middle-class voters of the region are a key demographic for Republican victory nationally.  And of course, standing in front of the building where the Constitution and Declaration of Independence is priceless.  (Mitt Romney probably wishes he had thought of it first.)

And when the folks in this region come together… well, that’s when the fun starts.  Sarah Palin got booed dropping the puck at a Flyers game; Santa Claus got booed by Eagles fans.  Phillies fans whip D cell batteries at players so fiercely you’d think they’re auditioning to pitch the seventh inning.

And that’s just sports.  Don’t forget about the omnipresent unions and occasional voter intimidation tactics.  Does Gingrich really want to stand in front of a crowd of Philadelphians to announce his candidacy?

On the plus side, if Elton John played at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding, maybe he’ll perform for Newt’s kickoff too:

Activating the base so the base activates others

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Karl Rove released a brief late last week which demonstrated how over simplistic the idea of “turning out the base” is.

The phrase is political shorthand, but it makes it sound like each election turns on whether dyed-in-the-wool Republicans or Yellow Dog Democrats actually show up to vote.  But as Rove points out, analysis of election results in 2010 and 2008 demonstrate that stalwarts of each party showed up to the polls.  So John McCain’s poor showing in the Presidential election could not be chalked up to Republicans sitting at home, right?

Well, not quite.  Those who strongly identify with one party or another probably do so because of an interest in politics, and are most likely to vote no matter what.   A lack of excitement about a candidate manifests itself in other ways – borderline activists are less likely to go to rallies, make phone calls, or knock on doors if their candidate isn’t exciting.  They’ll still vote, but they’ll do little else to convince others to vote along with them.  Rob Eno of the excellent Massachusetts blog Red Mass Group sums up the need for a good infrastructure based on local activists; that type of activism doesn’t happen if “the base” doesn’t feel like a candidate really represents them.

All of which adds up to less outreach to independents – who are, says Rove, the real collective fulcrum of each election.

The right answer on retirements

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Remember when politics was more than a sport?

Years back, I told Matt Lewis I thought candidates were starting to sound too much like strategists.  John Thune fell into that trap with his reaction to the slew of recent Democratic retirements:

“It certainly suggests that the pathway to get to 51 is achievable,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said Thursday. “I think depending on what happens in the next couple of years and depending on what retirements we have, a lot of these Democrat seats that are opening up, I think there are some opportunities for us — and I hope if we can get the right candidates in the races and resource them, we’ll have a shot at changing the equation.”

Nowhere in Thune’s response is the idea that Republicans could win every seat up for grabs with the ideas that voters are looking for.  He boils it down to an “equation” – a numbers game, as if he’s analyzing fantasy baseball for the MLB network.  Thune would have been better off giving a more general answer about the need to compete in all states, and to focus on working with everyone to make laws that will help out the American people no matter which party wins this election or that election.  It’s not all that quotable, but it’s still better than what was quoted.

It’s true that there are lots of strategic elements that go into winning races.  But speaking about them publicly belittles the fact that for all the microtargeting, get-out-the-vote technology, polling, and positioning, elections are still about ideas.  The techniques of battle don’t change the reason for battle.

And it’s simply poor technique to talk about the machinations of the campaign rather than the ideas.

As the political press covers the horse-race details of campaigns, it’s tempting to use their language and outlook.  But candidates, party leaders, and movement figures have to be above the fray, and their comments have to reflect a commitment to creating policies which benefit the American people rather than building campaigns which outscore the opponent.

Come to think of it, maybe the right kind of media-savvy, unflappable sports star would be a good role model after all.

 

Honoring the code

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

My daily drive into Your Nation’s Capital is usually spent listening to sports talk radio, splitting time between the national (ESPN’s Mike and Mike) and the local (106.7’s Sports Junkies).  Today, both dealt with the first bracket-buster of March Madness: the news that Brigham Young University’s Brandon Davies was kicked off the team for having consensual premarital sex.

If you talk to most Division I coaches, their second best player shtupping some coed when the team is on the verge of a national title run might would likely be a fine violation.  In the realm of athletic transgressions, it certainly beats having some booster offer a nuclear surfboard or whatever it is that John Calipari’s Kentucky Wildcats will get accused of the year after he leaves.  But Davies chose BYU and its strict rules – and when he misstepped, he admitted it and suffered the consequences.

In the interest of giving credit where due, the tone of the coverage has been surprisingly exceptional thus far.  Mike Greenberg in particular lauded BYU for sticking to their guns.  Even commentary that falls short of glowing praise for BYU at least understand that, though the merits of BYU’s code may be debatable, the code itself irrelevant to the discussion.  Davies opted to hold himself to that standard when he chose BYU (and even more so when he honorably chose to fess up).  In fact, BYU alums have pointed out that the honor code is far from fine print.

Davies is an important player, and dropping him from the team will impact BYU’s chances in the NCAA Tournament.  One wonders if other colleges – including religious schools with renowned athletic programs – would do the same.

What’s so great about “Standing with Scott”?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Tim Pawlenty received some attention for a recent video highlighting his tea party bona fides.  But as I wrote over at Pundit League, it’s his “Standing with Scott” video that means the most to T-Paw’s nascent campaign for the Presidency.

Unlike his other videos, which mix action-movie trailer style with platitudes about America’s problems and potential, “Standing with Scott” pointedly takes on public sector unions in general and the mess in Wisconsin in particular.  The footage of students cluelessly protesting based on their teachers’ instructions along with the direct criticism of the President give the video a clear, policy-driven message while maintaining a broad appeal.  It touches on specific issues without going into so much depth that the average viewer would turn away.  In that way, it’s a good road map for future messaging.

The video is also significant for who is not featured in it: Tim Pawlenty himself.  Outside of a mention at the beginning and a quote at the end, the former Minnesota governor is nowhere to be found.  With other videos featuring a heavy dose of T-Paw, the series run the risk of becoming an exercise in glorification.  More videos like “Standing with Scott” can counterbalance that.

And the video goes beyond messaging, directing viewers back to a landing page where they can sign up for the Freedom First PAC mailing list.  (It would be better if the page included facts about Walker’s position in Wisconsin, but it’s better than nothing.)

Pawlenty’s videos are an attempt to elevate the rhetoric and the urgency of the campaign and position the former Governor as a transformational leader in the mold of Obama.  But empty rah-rah speeches ring hollow in the ears of savvy activists.  If “Standing with Scott” becomes a first step – and more similar videos follow on other issues as they arise – questions about whether Pawlenty’s “Minnesota nice” personality can play on the Presidential stage may be answered.