Editor’s note: below, writers Jacob Carrel and Advik Shreekumar present differing interpretations of Gov. Walker’s media appearances.
Far from a Wonk
A number of recent press reports have discussed how Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has failed to answer seemingly basic questions appropriately, including “punting” on whether he believes in evolution and his failure to distance himself from Rudy Giuliani’s widely-criticized comments about Obama’s patriotism. While the fact that Walker is fundraising off his combative relationship with the national news media may imply that his behavior is intentional, Walker’s recent awkward attempts to avoid questions have been anything but planned—and they have hurt him.
Walker has previously had exposure to national media during his 2011 signing of Wisconsin’s Act 10, a bill designed to strip public-sector unions of many rights that passed despite near-universal Democratic opposition and large-scale protests in the Wisconsin State Capitol for over three weeks. Then, Walker was able to stick to his guns then as an economic conservative, and appeal to Tea Party supporters with the message of fiscal responsibility. Now, however, with a higher national profile, if Walker truly had a message, he could be conveying it far and wide—but he isn’t.
On the other hand, when it comes to foreign policy or social issues, the national media has not subjected Walker to as many tough questions. More importantly, Walker has been unable to attract coverage of his more recent policy changes in Wisconsin, as he is been too busy reeling from multiple missteps. While Walker was planning to pass so-called “right-to-work” legislation in Wisconsin, the national media remained fixated on his previous attempts to avoid questions. If Walker were truly so media-savvy, he would not have simply avoided the questions, but would have instead redirected them to something that he’s stronger on, such as economic issues.
Lastly, let’s remember the last Tea Party governor suddenly thrust on a national stage who attempted to blame the media for repeated missteps: Sarah Palin. While it is too soon to know Walker’s fate, it’s worth remembering that at this time in the last election cycle, conservatives were particularly excited about Newt Gingrich; Walker will have a long way to go—and many more interviews—before even a vote is cast. As the race draws closer and media scrutiny intensifies, Walker will have to develop a stronger interview strategy.
Simply, Walker is not some media genius: he’s stumbling with real questions he doesn’t know the right answer to, and trying the salvage his missteps with the tired “lame-stream media” trope.
Actions Speak Louder
Scott Walker’s reticence been so consistent it seems deliberate. Even when pressed to divulge his personal beliefs, Walker has stayed on his own script, explicitly deflecting queries he deems off-topic or poorly timed. On a trade trip to England, he passed up questions on his belief in evolution and foreign policy. At a meeting of the National Governors Association, he claimed a lack of knowledge—agnosticism, even—when asked if he thought Obama is a Christian. Walker followed this answer by arguing that such questions were emblematic of public distrust in politics for focusing on irrelevant issues rather than substantive policy.
By positioning himself in opposition to the media, Walker could be trying to cultivate a particular public image: that of a straight-talker, a man of action, a candidate above political squabbling. Time will tell whether the American public will warm to Walker’s ways, but in the short term, his actions raise questions of political accountability and the role of the media.
The press certainly has a duty to hold political figures accountable through rigorous investigation, and this may require them to spring questions when politicians least expect. Still, politicians reserve the right to decline questions they find irrelevant, provided they are willing to deal with the political fallout. Striking the appropriate balance between insight and inanity in the media requires active participation from both sides, and Walker’s reservedness is not harmful in itself.
In the short term, the public loses little by learning about Walker’s beliefs slowly, on a timeline that he dictates, as opposed to when the press asks. It would be troubling, however, if Walker ran a campaign without ever explaining these views His positions on science and Obama’s religion may not be the defining aspects of his candidacy, but they do speak to his policymaking motives and tact, respectively.
For now, though, it seems like Walker is trying to starve the media of the sound bites it hungers for, and that may be a blessing in disguise. While he is drawing criticism for secrecy, Walker is also setting an example other candidates could follow. If he inspires other presidential hopefuls to conspicuously push back against trite questioning, Walker could actually lay the groundwork for an election cycle that focuses on bona fide issues rather than birth certificates.
And while Walker shapes his media image, there are more important issues to debate—namely, his policies. In just the last month, he has signed a budget cut for the University of Wisconsin system and a right-to-work bill. While Walker may be a potential candidate, he is also a sitting governor, and a controversial one at that. Even if Scott Walker isn’t speaking to the media, his actions certainly are.
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.