Why Politicians Make Good Marketers (and Vice Versa)

So, I happened to catch a news broadcast this morning (I think it was on Good Morning America). The show featured an interview with a politician whom, apparently, was in a bit of a pickle last year. In October, he was "going through some things," and it resulted in nearly a quarter of his staff resigning.

So, he went on GMA this morning to set the record straight. What we learned was the following:

1. He's in a good place now.
2. He's taking care of his two kids.
3. He's taking care of his 88-year-old mother.
4. He got help.
5. He's in a good place now.

That's it -- over and over, regardless of the questions asked of him, his answers were the same: some variation of those answers.

And I got to thinking, most politicians are just good speakers (and some aren't even that!). Most don't actually write their own material -- they have speechwriters to do that for them. The only thing they're asked to do is speak effectively (and in the case of today's speaker, even that was a challenge). So, I thought, why aren't more marketing professionals turning to politics? An original thinker -- someone who can actually *think* of what to say, and say it effectively, should be a slam-dunk.

Much like how I did in grad school -- when you're able to write effectively, you're already 10 or 20 percent better than everyone else. I sat there, with my mouth wide open, listening to this politician spew the same stuff out over and over. And then I envisioned his speechwriter, who probably advised him to "mention" these few key points; doing the facepalm, while he heard his politician repeating the same lines over and over, like a trained parrot.

It's interesting that the older I get, the less "awed" I am by professions/people -- celebrities; politicians; doctors -- there's no mystique to them, anymore. Today's broadcast was another stark reminder....

The Greatest Disappointment of My Adult Life

Hi, my name is Chris, and I now find myself strangely addicted to reality shows.

For YEARS, I avoided such shows, commenting on the drivel that lazy TV networks were pushing out at viewers who lapped up the content. As a writer, I was particularly disappointed, since I saw the movement as a decided step away from quality writing on television (like The West Wing, The Shield, Lost, etc.).

So, when Survivor first came out, I avoided it (and, still haven't seen an episode yet). When Big Brother and The Amazing Race were introduced, I continued my mantra (despite the fact that, apparently, The Amazing Race was well done).

But, let me back up for a minute. Really, although I consider my new-found "love" for reality shows to be a recent development, it actually started a LONG time ago. I watched the first season of The Real World in 1992 (wow, that hurt, I could've sworn I was in high school when I first saw that show -- not already a college graduate!). And then, a number of years ago, when I had a prolonged stretch of unemployment (and, unlike this past stint, I actually did lapse into mild depression), I found myself staying up late at night, drawn to shows like The 5th Wheel and ElimiDATE, primarily due to the cringe-worthiness of the contestants and the decidedly mean-spirited approach taken by the show.

But, then I got a job, and that period of my life went away (and, the shows got canceled), which enabled me to get back to good television.

When we first got the Food Network, I was drawn to shows like Iron Chef America -- I don't like to cook; not one bit; but I do like to eat. And, there was something appealing about seeing great food being made, with the pressure of time AND the competitive angle.

So, officially, my first "reality" show that I began watching religiously was Chopped. Unlike Iron Chef America, the contestants really only have the time we see on the show. They get four semi-random ingredients per course, and they must make an appetizer, entree, dessert in 20-30 minutes (including plating). They have no knowledge of the ingredients beforehand, and after each course, one chef gets "chopped."

From there, it was only natural that I'd find Top Chef -- which I consider to be the best cooking show on television. The competitions are innovative, and they do an outstanding job of showcasing personalities of the chefs as well as the cooking (so, you're actually invested in the chef and his/her progress throughout the show).

Continuing on the award-winning path, I next discovered Deadliest Catch, drawn by the ravings of my friends, and also the dilemma facing the show last year. It's probably the most "real" of any reality show, which continued to fuel my belief that I wasn't betraying my commitment to quality television.

Then, along came American Idol.

Drawn, initially, by the fact that EVERYONE I knew was watching it, I wanted to see what the big deal was. I caught the last few episodes of the year Adam Lambert finished second, and then, watched last year's show in its entirety, each week (I even posted about it last year!). While I find the early stages laughable (done primarily to make people both laugh and become invested in the contestants), I like the competitive angle that emerges. I'm finding Steven Tyler to be decent; but I was one who really enjoyed Simon's bluntness (and, it'll be interesting to see how this year progresses).

I could live with that as my reality diet, I think; but -- the last weekday I was home before starting my job, I started watching a Jersey Shore marathon, and -- much like a bad car accident -- found myself drawn to the show as well. Mind you, my own personality is nothing like those on the show; I think I find myself in awe that people actually function that way; but it's an interesting study on our population (and, of course, I posted about this show, as well, earlier this year).

I think I'm tapped out of reality shows now. I am watching American Idol again this year (and disappointingly, my favorite contestant from last year -- Charity Vance -- who was eliminated in the Hollywood Round, apparently met the same fate this year (based on spoiler lists leaked on the 'Net that detail which top 40 contestants advanced out of Hollywood Week)). Never mind that though, Charity seems to be doing JUST fine for herself (she has five songs on iTunes, and has been described as Katy Perry with her pop sensibilities; but with a better voice, better song creation and more introspection in her lyrics -- that's not a bad combination.

Here's one of her videos (I can't stop humming this song -- so advanced for an 18/19 year old). I'm reasonably sure she'll have a great, long career, even without American Idol on her resume.

(Sorry I've been posting far less than before, and -- even more damning, my recent posts have all been slightly less serious than I'd intended. I do have a lengthy, fairly serious post in the pipeline (probably the next one), and I may have another two posts, upcoming, with some semi-big announcements!)

The Simple Things

So, three weeks into my new job and slowly my life is returning to a state of normalcy (even though I didn't work a full week in all that time -- this winter has been brutal, closing my company twice already).


Last weekend, my wife and I did something we haven't done in years -- went to a double feature at the movies. Before we owned a home (e.g., the years of no responsibility), we did this quite often; but we haven't done it much lately, and certainly not while I was unemployed. And, with coupons and rewards points, etc., it was quite reasonable -- $30 for tickets to two shows, small soda, small popcorn, box 'o candy.

In truth, the 'boycott' was never truly about the cost (although, while unemployed, even $30 is difficult to rationalize), rather, it was always about the feeling that it was wrong to spend time and money on something like the movies while I wasn't working. We certainly didn't wallow in our misery; but we spent our time doing other things that were less costly -- hanging out with friends, etc.

But, it did feel good to head out and actually do something 'extravagant' again (and, yes, I know $30 on two movies isn't extravagant; but -- trust me -- it feels that way).

For the interested, the two movies we saw were "No Strings Attached" with Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher (raunchier than I'd expect; but predictable, with some funny and some cringe-worthy parts) and "The Dilemma" with Vince Vaughn and Kevin James (a truly dysfunctional film -- doesn't know if it wants to be a buddy comedy or a relationship drama, and there were a few moments (one in particular) that just seem as though they were added with no regards to the character development established up until that point) ... a shame, as I was hoping to laugh equally as hard as I did at Wedding Crashers -- no such luck.