Since nobody keeps track of it, there is no exact figure. But betcha dollars to donuts that millions of dollars is spent each year on media training.
Just as there are expensive trainers to teach your mutt new tricks, there are also expense trainers who teach politicians how to survive in this current turbulent and combative media environment at all levels of government.
And it’s also a good bet that as you read this Messers. Biden and Trump are deeply engaged in their own media training for this weeks Thriller in Manil... err in Atlanta, as they face off in the first presidential debate.
But here’s the dirty little secret: All the mind-boggling attention that will be given to every word and phrase the two might use against their adversary or to advance their own story, at the end of the day the “messaging” aspect of the training won’t mean squat.
Fact of the matter is in all the presidential and vice presidential debates only a handful produced any magical/memorable moments when the debate was pretty much decided by a knockout verbal punch.
In 1988, Vice Presidential Democratic hopeful Lloyd Benson speaking to his GOP opponent who had just compared himself to Jack Kennedy fired back at Dan Quayle.
He slowly and strategically began building the suspense with each new sentence.
“I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator (as the crescendo peaks,) you are no Jack Kennedy.
Somewhere in Indiana these days Dan Quayle awakens to that nightmare from time to time no doubt.
Or there was the performance of President Ronald Reagan four years earlier, who had been blistered by the Democrats for allegedly being missing in action because of the number of candles on his birthday cake.
Opponent Democrat Walter Mondale was making some hay on the issue when the incumbent rose to the occasion in what had to be a well rehearsed and timed line just waiting for the right opening and here it was.
“I want you to know also I will not make age an issue in this campaign” Mr. R. glanced at his opponent at the next podium while going in for the kill. “I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponents youth and inexperience.”
Game. Set. Match. Even Mr. Mondale laughed out loud.
But please note that neither of these two mic drop moments had anything to do with their policy positions or how they would govern if elected. Sure they talked about those but in the end it was pretty much a “who gives a hoot” reaction from media and viewers on the more substantive answers.
So if a candidate regurgitating his or her finely crafted media trained verbiage in a debate is not that critical, what the heck is important?
Answer: the non-verbal performance.
In the end, viewers/voters hear the words but pretty much, they forget them. What they do remember is the impression the candidate left behind. Was he or she combative to a fault? Did they look like they knew what they were talking about. Did they invade their opponents personal space which a Republican tried to do against candidate Hillary Clinton. The joint came unglued when he did and it.
Fact is that is what TV is all about ie. image, the after-glow, the non-substantive stuff that lingers after the debate lights are shut-off.
In the real world this is the norm when somebody recognizes you from the telly. “Saw you on the tube last night.”
Hey thanks. That is very kind of you. What was the story about?
Pause. Then another pause as the frantic search in the non-existent memory bank draws a blank which results in this, “Well I can’t remember, but man your hair looked ugly.”
So much for content in a TV story being more impactful that the visuals.
At the and of these debates, the question that would get the biggest response is, “Who would you like to have a beer with?”
It’s that kind of stuff that drives those high priced media guru’s nuts and it’s probably not the best foundation either for deciding who should run this country.
