In Search Of Storytellers

By Charlie Cook
© National Journal Group Inc.

January 25, 2005

This column was originally featured on CongressDaily/AM on January 25, 2005.

Sometimes the best questions that should be asked after each election are the ones that never are, and maybe they are never asked for a reason: No one wants to hear the answers.

But for all the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in each election cycle on television advertising, how much of it is wasted on formulaic ads that look and sound alike and lack even the slightest bit of creativity?

As I sat in perhaps 100 hotel rooms over the last year in more than three dozen states, my reaction to so many Senate, House, gubernatorial and even presidential campaign ads was wondering how that media consultant thought anyone might be influenced in any way by that advertisement. A great many are an insult to the intelligence of voters.

Recently, a campaign manager expressed irritation that too many ads a certain media consultant produced for his client in an open Senate race looked exactly like the ones the consultant also produced for an incumbent senator in a completely different part of the country. Almost word for word. There was virtually nothing unique to that particular candidate or opponent, that state or region, or the circumstances in that race.

Too many ads today are boilerplate, straight out of the cookie cutter, and they hardly get noticed by voters.

It wasn't always the case. Many, though not all, of the first- and second-generation media consultants were originally filmmakers. They learned a craft and then applied it to politics.

Those who came to know and understand politics then brought their craft to television advertising, telling a story and making a convincing case why their client was a unique and compelling figure and why voters would be lucky to have that person as an elected official.

I've always thought that negative ads were fairly easy to do. As the old saying goes, "Any jackass can knock down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one."

That is certainly an overstatement, but there is a grain of truth that a negative ad is not the most difficult thing to construct. But few are memorable or credible. It is in the realm of positive advertising that the greatest deterioration has occurred. It is an almost lost art.

Over a quarter century ago, I was cleaning out an office closet and ran across a tape of a 15-minute ad that the late documentary filmmaker and sometime Democratic media consultant Charles Guggenheim produced. Titled "A Man for Arkansas," it was prepared for Sid McMath's 1962 gubernatorial campaign in the Razorback State. Despite the fact that my parents were both from Arkansas, I had never heard of McMath (I was nine years old and living in an adjacent state when he last appeared on a ballot).

But watching that ad literally brought tears to my eyes. It told his life story, his view of the world and what he thought a governor was supposed to do. It was truly a work of art, and it made him a compelling figure. When was the last time you saw an ad that wove a story and left you moved? Obviously 15 minutes is a luxury not every campaign can afford, but through the 1960's and 1970's, Guggenheim, who passed away a little over two years ago, did fabulous work for his clients.

On the Republican side, Bob Goodman was a fabulous consultant who also brought a filmmaker's eye to the world of media consulting. Another Democrat was the late David Sawyer, who in one ad turned prickly Boston Mayor Kevin White into "a loner in love with his city," taking the edge off the candidate and making him more of a fighter for his city, rather than a jerk, as many had thought. The late Bob Squier was yet another media consultant who knew how to tell a story. If there is a common thread here, it is that most of the craftsmen have retired or passed away.

Many of these consultants, in both parties, are good friends of mine. Heck, if I didn't do what I am doing for a living, I might well be doing that.

What has happened is that few current media consultants have any training in filmmaking. They are campaign operatives who have moved into the world of producing television commercials. While there is nothing inherently wrong with that, as they do know politics and have invaluable experience, the craft of storytelling is missing. It would be just as big a mistake for a campaign to go out and hire a documentary filmmaker with little knowledge of or experience in politics. But rarely do I see those two sets of skills co-exist in a single media consultant or even a firm, with one partner from each discipline.

While there is some discussion over whether political polling is as reliable as it used to be, it is surprising me to that with the enormous amount of money being spent by candidates, parties and independent groups on television advertising and, to a much lesser extent, radio, few are asking whether these ads are working.

Since last November's election plenty of rocks are being thrown at campaign consultants on the Democratic side -- some for good reasons. But this is a problem that is not unique to either side. Indeed, as a general rule, I don't think Republican ads are any better than Democratic ads. The problem is more systemic than partisan. But it is a problem, whether anyone is talking about it or not.