May 3, 2024

Monet

I’m writing this on November 14, Claude Monet’s birthday. The quintessential Impressionist master was born in 1840 and died in 1926 at the age of 86.

Monet was an exceptionally productive artist, in fact the Impressionist movement got its name from a Monet painting titled “Impression, Sunrise” in the 1874 exhibition of a group of “independent artists.”

Monet struggled to get fully recognized for his genius and to sell paintings at a respectable price until art dealer Durand-Ruel exhibited his haystack series in 1891. After the successful haystack series of paintings, Monet created several more series, including his most famous — the water lilies. The water lily painting above is hanging the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and was painted in 1919.

So what? Why write about Monet in November, 2020?

Because when Monet painted the picture above, he was 79 years old, a year older than Joe Biden will be on November 20, 2020. Monet created his water lilies masterpieces while he was in his late 70s, and finished his greatest masterpiece, the huge water lily panels in the Musee de L’Orangerie in 1924, when we was 84, the same age Biden will be when he finishes his first term in 2024 as the 46th President of the United States.

I predict that Biden’s greatest masterpiece as a politician is yet to come — he has the experience and he is exactly the right age.

I Wept

For 10 days before Saturday, November 7, when all the TV networks called Biden the winner (and more important, Trump the loser) I couldn’t look at the news because I was so worried than Trump might win.  I was a media coward.  I realized that this behavior was a pattern. Whenever I am faced with a difficult and distasteful situation, I often retreat and shut down rather than confront it.

On the other hand, my wife, Julia, for the last month confronted the situation and did something about it.  She, like millions of women had the courage, discipline and grit to turn out the vote for the Biden-Harris ticket.  Julia was on the phone every evening for over two hours calling people to urge them to vote.

Biden and Harris owe their victory to urban and suburban women like Julia and, especially, to Black women. 

Even though I couldn’t muster the courage or energy to work for the outcome I wanted, the first candidate in the Democratic primary way back in what seems to be decade ago in January, 2019, that I supported financially was Kamala Harris.  I supported Hillary Clinton in 2016, and I supported Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren in 2019 and 2020 because I felt that men had screwed up long enough, and that we needed a compassionate, nurturing, caring woman for president.

The title of my Ph.D. dissertation (unfinished) in 1983 was “The Nature of Broadcast General Manag­ers’ Work: A Comparative Study of Results-Based Effective and Less Effective and Male and Female Managers.”  An overly opaque, academic way of saying “why women are better managers.”  I had recognized that women were better, more effective managers when I was able to observe them as sales managers and news directors in radio and television stations I consulted and did training for in the late 1980s and 1990s and at the Management Seminar for News Executives at the University of Missouri School of Journalism.

These women were better salespeople, better sales managers, better news directors and better general managers because they were more collaborative, more cooperative and more nurturing (better coaches).  If this was true in broadcast sales, news and general management, why wouldn’t it be true in other businesses and in politics?

My admiration for Black women probably began when I was a teenager in Washington, D.C.  when I realized that the cook, Maggie, my mother and father hired for special and holiday meals was a superior chef and person.  One summer we took Maggie to our summer rental home in Rehoboth, DE for the two weeks my father had off.  After dinner, I would do the dishes while my father and Maggie would drink scotch and talk about life and politics like two old buddies.

This admiration for Black women was reinforced when I was on the Graduate Admission Committee at the University School of Journalism.  One year, it might have been 1992, we admitted Lynise Weeks to the graduate program.  We reversed our original vote not to admit her because the graduate dean, Esther Thorson, advocated for Lynise and urged us to admit her.

As I remember, the reason Esther Thorson advocated for Lynise was because after the Graduate Admissions Committee turned her down, Lynise sat outside the graduate dean’s office for almost a day insisting that she wouldn’t leave until the dean saw her.  Exasperated, Thorson, finally saw Lynise, who told the dean that, “You have to let me in because I’m going to change the world.”  Thorson believed her and urged the committee to reverse our decision and admit Lynise into the Broadcast News sequence.  So, we did.

Lynise was a large woman with a dark black complexion. She filled the television screen and was hard to light, but she broke down these barriers just as she broke down the barriers to admission into the J School. She became the most popular (internally and externally) reporter on university-owned KOMU-TV because of her warm, sonorous voice, her commanding presence and her highly intelligent reporting.

At the J School graduation award ceremony I gave Lynise a hammer and said, “This is the new Hammer Award and goes to Lynise because she broke down barriers and won’t take ‘no’ for an answer.” Almost immediately after graduation she got a job as a reporter at WTMJ-TV in Milwaukee, and after several years there was given her own half-hour weekly consumer-advocacy program, virtually unheard of in local television. Lynise passed away in early 2008 after battling kidney failure.

I think one of the reasons I admired Lynise was because she reminded me of another Black woman, in addition to Maggie, who I admired — Barbara Jordan. Jordan was the first Black congresswoman from Texas, and was a member of the House Judiciary Committee. As a member of that committee, she gave a magnificent opening speech in July, 1974, at the impeachment hearing of Richard Nixon. I remember watching her speech on television and how it influenced me to turn against Nixon, for whom I had voted.

When my daughter, Crickett, sent me the picture at the top of this blog post, I wept. I wept buckets. I wept because the picture of Harris and the shadow of the courageous little Black girl going to a desegregated school in Norman Rockwell’s iconic painting perfectly portrayed the historic, gritty journey of Black women that culminated in Harris’s election. I wept as a cathartic release of my anxiety. I wept because of my shame of non-involvement. I wept because I realized that Maggie, Lynise and Barbara, all of whom I admired, were not here to weep for joy.

My reclamation was weeping for them.

A Referendum on Decency

On one my favorite podcasts, “The Ezra Klein Show,” Ezra’s guest on podcast #352 was Stuart Stephens, a former high-level Republican consultant, who said that what the upcoming election boiled down to was “a referendum on decency.”

While I watched the Democratic convention, the one word that I heard more than any other (with the obvious exception of “Joe”) was “decent.” In a “Five Thirty Eight” podcast that discussed the convention, one analyst said that the Democrats had nominated “a decent guy who everyone can relate to.”

In previous blog posts I have emphasized the concept of decency. In a post titled “The Cancel Culture Is Illiberal” I wrote “Instead of a list of ideas that should be excluded from a free-expression dialogue, I believe a broad concept should be applied — decency.” In a blog post titled “What Is The Future of the Republican Party?” I ended the post with “Will the future of the Republican party be driven by hate speech or decency?”

I’m convinced that the presidential election is absolutely a referendum on decency, and my point of view was reinforced by the title of Maureen Dowd’s most recent column titled “Joe’s Fearsome Weapon Against Trump: Simple Decency.”

So be it.

Joe Biden’s Earned Media

There were many factors that contributed to Joe Biden’s big win on Super Tuesday to overtake Bernie Sanders as the odds-on favorite to be the Democratic nominee, but none of those factors were more important than earned media. A Biden aide boasted on CNN that the Biden campaign was riding a “tsunami of earned media.”

The concept of earned media is not new. It used to be called publicity, which is, simply, media coverage that is free. Brands and politicians used to hire publicity professionals or public relations agencies to get positive mentions in newspaper columns or interviews on radio or television. Before the age of the Internet, the biggest publicity get was an interview on the “Tonight” show.

A young, dishonest real estate developer, Donald Trump, perfected the art of manipulating the media and getting free media coverage. Trump’s decades-long practice (more than 10 years and 10,000 hours) of attracting free attention paid off big in his 2016 run for the Republican nomination and subsequent campaign for president.

In 2016 Hillary Clinton’s campaign used traditional media advertising, mostly on television, and we see happened. Trump’s free media exposure overwhelmed Clinton’s advertising which caused many pundits to bring up the old advertising saw that good advertising can’t sell a bad product. The same phrase was dusted off in 2020 when Michael Bloomberg’s half-a-billion-dollar ad campaign, including two Super Bowl commercials, earned him only four delegates on Super Tuesday. Good ads can’t sell a bad product, and the Bloomberg product was defined when primary voters saw his disastrous first debate performance. He obviously didn’t see it as a performance.

In the South Carolina primary and on Super Tuesday it was Biden who got the most votes, and those votes were driven, in part, by earned media and overwhelming support by black voters who trust Biden. The majority of votes for Sanders came from young Internet natives (those under 45) who get their news primarily from social media. Many Internet natives have cut the cord from TV and also hate advertising, so are not exposed to or pay attention to television advertising, thus not to Bloomberg’s ads.

Philip Kotler is widely regarded as the father of modern marketing. In his book, Marketing 4.0: Moving from Traditional to Digital, Kotler and his co-authors dismiss the outmoded four Ps of marketing (product, price, place, and promotion) and replace them with the five As of digital-era marketing: Aware, Appeal, Ask, Act, Advocate. See the graphic below from Marketing 4.0 that I used (with permission) in the fifth edition of my textbook, Media Selling: Digital, Television, Print, Audio, and Cross-Platform, that will be published in July. The graphic shows how the five As of digital-era marketing work.

As you can see, the ultimate goal of marketing is not only to get consumers to buy a product (Act) but also to Advocate for a product, to recommend it–specifically to give a positive review, to like it on social media, or retweet a positive comment. Most consumers, especially younger ones trust online reviews and recommendations from friends and even strangers more than they trust advertising. Therefore, earned media is more believable than advertising…and it’s free. You can’t beat free.

Also, earned media is typically not only more trustworthy than advertising but also in order to advocate for a product, you don’t have to be a purchaser. For example, a young fan of cars may not be able to afford a Tesla, but can love the sleek electric car and advocate for it online.

The advent of the Internet disrupted marketing, and in 2016 Trump was smart enough to get tons of earned media, some that was even sneaked onto social media by the Russians. However, except for Fox News, most responsible media have seen their mistake in giving Trump so much free coverage and now do not overly publicize his tweets or campaign rallies.

Perhaps Joe Biden will gather more and more positive, free earned media coverage, and maybe Trump’s earned media coverage will be more about his bumbling, lying incompetence on COVID-19 than about his previously untested celebrity in 2016.

Let’s hope.