The role of a media coach is part marketing guru, part acting coach and part therapist. There is no single approach that fits every individual. Each ‘performer’ has distinctive skills and talents, and faces a unique set of facts, circumstances and challenges. Effective media coaching steps back from all these variables and helps the client assess these competing factors, creates an effective strategy, and then assists in the implementation of that plan.
The goal of media training is not to turn the client into a replica of the guy who reads the teleprompter on the evening news, but rather to help the individual maximize those strengths and assets that are unique to him; to bring a highly concentrated mix of skills and talents to a media that otherwise diminishes and distorts.
Stellar on-camera performances begin with comfort and confidence. My approach to one-on-one coaching is to get to know my clients, identify their unique strengths and help them learn to create the environment for powerful presentations.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Is It Too Late for Michael Steele?
The very public clash of personalities between Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele elevated the talk show host to the role of party leader, and diminished the party chairman to the butt of late night one-liners. Has Michael Steele become the Howard Dean of the Republican Party?
The answer to the question depends entirely on Chairman Steele and his willingness to position himself as a serious and thoughtful leader going forward.
In the meantime, the Chairman could benefit from some close examination of his previous television appearances. His strengths include a comfort and confidence on camera that often makes him likable and fun to watch. He is attractive, charismatic and at times has the ability to come through the lens and capture the viewer.
The flip side of this is that he gives the appearance of not recognizing the importance of every nationally televised appearance. He appears to “wing it”, “shoot from the hip”, and recycle talking points from last week’s RNC bulletin.
One example of this is his most recent appearance with Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show. Given the tempest the Chairman found himself in at air time, he could not have had any doubt about the line of questioning he would face. Still, he seemed unprepared to answer the basic question: “Do you/Republicans want to see President Obama fail?”
Steele was non-responsive, dancing around the questioning. He came off as evasive and slick. (Side note on wardrobe: A ‘slick’ politician should never wear pinstripes, it’s a dangerous combination.) Lauer continued on this single line of attack. Steele failed to answer or successfully refocus and redirect. The longer the interview went on, the faster he talked. You see the Chairman’s anxiety rise and his body language reflected his mounting frustration. Lauer set a sprinter’s pace. Steele struggled to keep up.
Chairman Steele would benefit greatly from support staff to assist him in more carefully choosing his venues and preparing for television appearances. This should include extensive consideration of larger goals and outcomes he would like to achieve on behalf of the RNC. In short, he should be more strategic in his choices.
From time to time in his role as Chairman, Mr. Steele will no doubt be required to work with a teleprompter. Given his experiences with Fox News, it’s not surprising that once again, Steele appears quite confident and comfortable with the equipment. Still, a review of his Lincoln Day address, in which he relied on a prompter, raises a few concerns that are common to the venue.
First, this very charismatic and energetic personality gets “flattened” in this setting. His sparkle and animation are diminished, the resonance and timber of his voice seem flat (although that could be a function of the microphone) and he seems to be channeling the nightly news anchor, rather than playing to his own strengths. He seems unnecessarily restrained in this setting. Media training might appropriately focus on dialing up the personality in this venue.
The answer to the question depends entirely on Chairman Steele and his willingness to position himself as a serious and thoughtful leader going forward.
In the meantime, the Chairman could benefit from some close examination of his previous television appearances. His strengths include a comfort and confidence on camera that often makes him likable and fun to watch. He is attractive, charismatic and at times has the ability to come through the lens and capture the viewer.
The flip side of this is that he gives the appearance of not recognizing the importance of every nationally televised appearance. He appears to “wing it”, “shoot from the hip”, and recycle talking points from last week’s RNC bulletin.
One example of this is his most recent appearance with Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show. Given the tempest the Chairman found himself in at air time, he could not have had any doubt about the line of questioning he would face. Still, he seemed unprepared to answer the basic question: “Do you/Republicans want to see President Obama fail?”
Steele was non-responsive, dancing around the questioning. He came off as evasive and slick. (Side note on wardrobe: A ‘slick’ politician should never wear pinstripes, it’s a dangerous combination.) Lauer continued on this single line of attack. Steele failed to answer or successfully refocus and redirect. The longer the interview went on, the faster he talked. You see the Chairman’s anxiety rise and his body language reflected his mounting frustration. Lauer set a sprinter’s pace. Steele struggled to keep up.
Chairman Steele would benefit greatly from support staff to assist him in more carefully choosing his venues and preparing for television appearances. This should include extensive consideration of larger goals and outcomes he would like to achieve on behalf of the RNC. In short, he should be more strategic in his choices.
From time to time in his role as Chairman, Mr. Steele will no doubt be required to work with a teleprompter. Given his experiences with Fox News, it’s not surprising that once again, Steele appears quite confident and comfortable with the equipment. Still, a review of his Lincoln Day address, in which he relied on a prompter, raises a few concerns that are common to the venue.
First, this very charismatic and energetic personality gets “flattened” in this setting. His sparkle and animation are diminished, the resonance and timber of his voice seem flat (although that could be a function of the microphone) and he seems to be channeling the nightly news anchor, rather than playing to his own strengths. He seems unnecessarily restrained in this setting. Media training might appropriately focus on dialing up the personality in this venue.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Bobby Jindal - Still the GOP's Best Bet
Much ink has already been spilled regarding Governor Jindal’s performance following the President’s address to Congress earlier this month. Let’s begin with what has not been as widely discussed; the Governor’s strength of intellect, his mastery of public policy and his obvious passion for the people of Louisiana.
A review of Governor Jindal’s management of evacuations and preparations for Hurricane Gustav last summer demonstrates his strengths: his ability to assimilate vast quantities of conflicting and shifting information, his willingness to act decisively and his ability to communicate these complexities under pressure.
In television interviews during this emergency, the Governor exudes a sense of command and urgency, but also inspires confidence. He is comfortable and in command of the facts, deftly managing events that have intimidated and diminished other leaders.
On the flip side, this event also demonstrates what we might call the “vices of his virtues”.
Television is rarely the appropriate venue to download all of the factors and variables of the decision making processes. Governor Jindal’s ability to communicate more effectively with his audience would have been enhanced by determining in advance precisely what the citizens of Louisiana needed to know, and communicating those few things, simply and succinctly, over and over again. This requires a bit of intellectual discipline, and sometimes, good staff support.
Governor Jindal is at his best talking specifics. This is a man who clearly knows and understands the details of policy and administration. He is smart, articulate and appropriately animated. His February 22nd appearance of on NBC’s Meet the Press once again demonstrates these strengths. Governor Jindal is in command of not just the “executive summary” of the proposed stimulus package. He understands the details and their consequences, perhaps better than many of those who voted on the bill. Jindal also managed the moderator effectively, refusing to allow David Gregory to set the agenda and define his choices.
The Governor anticipates objections to his positions and defends thoroughly and amiably. He is responsive to the moderator’s questions, without surrendering direction of the interview and speaks to the interests of his constituents. Here again, we see the qualities that make Bobby Jindal one of the most promising young leaders of the Republican Party nationally. This is the Bobby Jindal that excites conservatives, and that most of America has not yet had the opportunity to meet.
What the Governor fails to do in the midst of all of this is reach through the camera and grab the viewer in a personal way. The viewer is left appreciating the man’s intellect but without any sense of his likability. The Governor fails to build a relationship with the viewer. Part of this is attributable to Jindal’s tendency to focus almost exclusively on details and complexities of the issues. Here again, his performance could be improved by considering larger goals and specific objectives, and determining how the facts can serve and support those goals. Again this requires the ability to step back from the issue, assess the audience, and exploit the appearance for its larger opportunity.
Given all these strengths and abilities, the Governor’s performance following the President’s address is all the more frustrating.
There are philosophical issues related to this, which reflect the current internal debate within the Republican Party. Clearly, the message and the content fell flat. I will leave further discussion of that to others, and focus my remarks on a few more technical observations.
The practice of allowing the loyal opposition an opportunity to respond to a Presidential event is an art form in search of an application. I don’t think anyone has really mastered it yet. One of the primary factors that has not yet been fully exploited (and therefore presents a pregnant opportunity) is one of physical venue.
Consider the contrast that strikes the viewer at home: First, a wildly popular President who is a practiced and articulate communicator in his own right; a (mostly) adoring crowd cheering and seeking autographs, and all the color and pageantry of a national event broadcast live from the Capitol. Then the venue changes abruptly. The viewer is in a silent, marble hallway, watching a lone and little known figure reading off a teleprompter to an empty room. I know of no one on the American political scene who could have made this stark contrast compelling.
Two other points to consider; I suspect the Governor was not intimately involved in writing the script. He didn’t seem to relate to the material in a personal way. Either the Governor needs to find a speechwriter who has a deeper sense of who he is personally, or the Governor needs to take a greater hand in drafting the material. Perhaps both.
Secondly, the teleprompter. Most of the people who criticize a politician’s ineffective use of a prompter, have never had to use one themselves. Allow me to interject a personal observation. It is harder than it looks. It is a skill, not a talent. Like all skills, it requires practice. Lots of it, and not just 24 hours before a major address.
A review of Governor Jindal’s management of evacuations and preparations for Hurricane Gustav last summer demonstrates his strengths: his ability to assimilate vast quantities of conflicting and shifting information, his willingness to act decisively and his ability to communicate these complexities under pressure.
In television interviews during this emergency, the Governor exudes a sense of command and urgency, but also inspires confidence. He is comfortable and in command of the facts, deftly managing events that have intimidated and diminished other leaders.
On the flip side, this event also demonstrates what we might call the “vices of his virtues”.
Television is rarely the appropriate venue to download all of the factors and variables of the decision making processes. Governor Jindal’s ability to communicate more effectively with his audience would have been enhanced by determining in advance precisely what the citizens of Louisiana needed to know, and communicating those few things, simply and succinctly, over and over again. This requires a bit of intellectual discipline, and sometimes, good staff support.
Governor Jindal is at his best talking specifics. This is a man who clearly knows and understands the details of policy and administration. He is smart, articulate and appropriately animated. His February 22nd appearance of on NBC’s Meet the Press once again demonstrates these strengths. Governor Jindal is in command of not just the “executive summary” of the proposed stimulus package. He understands the details and their consequences, perhaps better than many of those who voted on the bill. Jindal also managed the moderator effectively, refusing to allow David Gregory to set the agenda and define his choices.
The Governor anticipates objections to his positions and defends thoroughly and amiably. He is responsive to the moderator’s questions, without surrendering direction of the interview and speaks to the interests of his constituents. Here again, we see the qualities that make Bobby Jindal one of the most promising young leaders of the Republican Party nationally. This is the Bobby Jindal that excites conservatives, and that most of America has not yet had the opportunity to meet.
What the Governor fails to do in the midst of all of this is reach through the camera and grab the viewer in a personal way. The viewer is left appreciating the man’s intellect but without any sense of his likability. The Governor fails to build a relationship with the viewer. Part of this is attributable to Jindal’s tendency to focus almost exclusively on details and complexities of the issues. Here again, his performance could be improved by considering larger goals and specific objectives, and determining how the facts can serve and support those goals. Again this requires the ability to step back from the issue, assess the audience, and exploit the appearance for its larger opportunity.
Given all these strengths and abilities, the Governor’s performance following the President’s address is all the more frustrating.
There are philosophical issues related to this, which reflect the current internal debate within the Republican Party. Clearly, the message and the content fell flat. I will leave further discussion of that to others, and focus my remarks on a few more technical observations.
The practice of allowing the loyal opposition an opportunity to respond to a Presidential event is an art form in search of an application. I don’t think anyone has really mastered it yet. One of the primary factors that has not yet been fully exploited (and therefore presents a pregnant opportunity) is one of physical venue.
Consider the contrast that strikes the viewer at home: First, a wildly popular President who is a practiced and articulate communicator in his own right; a (mostly) adoring crowd cheering and seeking autographs, and all the color and pageantry of a national event broadcast live from the Capitol. Then the venue changes abruptly. The viewer is in a silent, marble hallway, watching a lone and little known figure reading off a teleprompter to an empty room. I know of no one on the American political scene who could have made this stark contrast compelling.
Two other points to consider; I suspect the Governor was not intimately involved in writing the script. He didn’t seem to relate to the material in a personal way. Either the Governor needs to find a speechwriter who has a deeper sense of who he is personally, or the Governor needs to take a greater hand in drafting the material. Perhaps both.
Secondly, the teleprompter. Most of the people who criticize a politician’s ineffective use of a prompter, have never had to use one themselves. Allow me to interject a personal observation. It is harder than it looks. It is a skill, not a talent. Like all skills, it requires practice. Lots of it, and not just 24 hours before a major address.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
