In a contemporary political reality where boldface scandals and shrieking headlines fade away like mist – remember Bob Woodward’s book and Paul Manafort flipping? – we have a moment.
The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court, and allegations of teenage sexual assault by Christine Blasey Ford, has done the impossible in the 2018 media ecosystem: held our attention for more than a week.
That this flashpoint arrives amid a tumultuous midterm campaign, within the sustained #MeToo climate, and with political tensions heightened at unprecedented levels, means that we may not only be living history until Thursday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, but also at a critical intersection in contemporary politics.
The stakes could not be higher. President Trump’s agenda, control of Congress, the Supreme Court’s ideology for the next decade and beyond, momentum toward the 2020 presidential race, activism and engagement among the Republican and Democratic bases – all of this will be defined and influenced by the week ahead for months and years to come.
As a strategic communications adviser, as a former Senate communications director (for one of the remaining undecided lawmakers), and as a former Beltway journalist who has reported on or closely observed much of Washington, D.C.’s political paroxysms this century, here is I think you should watch for this week:
- Narrative: Which party succeeds at defining what the hearings are about? Is it about an alleged awful event in the 1980s? Is it about the credibility of a Supreme Court nominee who has incontrovertibly said this event never happened? Does it become about the “Old Boys Club?” Is it a shrouded debate over Roe v. Wade? Is it about the “11th Hour accusation,” or does the compressed timetable mean it becomes a contrast to Merrick Garland’s long nomination that expired when Trump was elected? Whoever wins the framing battle will likely win the day.
- Questioning: Do the Senate Judiciary Committee members seem to be asking questions in an effort to gain knowledge, rather than supporting their baseline view? While it’s true that most of the committee members have made their voting intentions known, what is at stake this week is public understanding and public support for the nominee or his accuser. The more you can present yourself as a proxy for the American audience, posing the basic questions that most viewers have, the more you can sway opinion. This also includes asking appropriate questions of this delicate matter, and not getting too graphic or aggressive.
- Rush to judgement: Related to the above, can the participants keep a poker face? And can their comments during the hearing and in media appearances beforehand demonstrate openness to what they are about to hear? At this point, neither party is doing very well on this count. Both Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have made comments that bely their initial stance that Ford deserves to be heard – the president through bellicose Friday tweets and McConnell by vowing to a conference that the Senate would “plow right through” the hearings and confirm Kavanaugh. On the Democratic side, many committee members in the minority have lost some amount of credibility by having stated their opposition to Kavanaugh weeks before the confirmation hearings.
- Performance: As of this writing, the Senate Judiciary Committee is planning on having Ford and Kavanaugh testify on Thursday. While Kavanaugh has years of experience on the bench and in heightened political moments, Christine Blasey Ford is a novice at tense proceedings like the one she is walking into. Will Kavanaugh remain entirely composed under the lights, as he did in the first round of questioning? As a media trainer myself, I’d recommend that he bring persistence, humility, and focus to his testimony – as well as an understanding of the concerns raised by the accusation. Will Ford come across as sincere or stiffly overcoached, given that she is likely going to be in training for the next 100 hours to get her prepared? My recommendation to her team would be to take her authentic self and build what you can from there: You can’t reinvent her in ten days, but her owning her story in her own voice could resonate.
- The shadows of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill: In my lifetime, the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings were one of the top five biggest political moments. The scar tissue from this debate still lingers across the political spectrum, and this anecdote will be selectively recalled to rally supporters from both sides. One variable here is that there is nearly no chance that Justice Thomas would weigh in; his reluctance to speak publicly is well known. But Anita Hill will most definitely be sharing her thoughts this week — will her point of view polarize things further, or find some common ground?
The next seven days will likely dictate the midterm elections in November. The next week will shape our worldviews, our politics, and perspectives for years to come. (Not to mention filling bookshelves, newsracks, and campus libraries with political science theses.)
Every journalist, media influencer, and lawmaker needs to watch their public comments and reporting judiciously – and not amplify misinformation or vitriol. It’s always possible to have no comment in the halls of Congress; it’s frequently advisable to report “we are still gathering information on this” rather than feigning certainty. Everyone should watch the coverage with circumspection, and invest the extra time and effort to make sure you are getting the full story and weighing the voices being heard.
Matthew Felling (@matthewfelling) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a former print/TV/radio journalist, media critic, and U.S. Senate communications director, now serving as a public affairs and crisis consultant with Burson-Marsteller in Washington.
