When Sound Bites Come Back to Bite

Tweet

The truth is, there's no truth in politics.

As many media trainers preach, nothing is "off the record." And though political candidates are deliberate and cautious during media interviews, they often don't think about each and every sentence in standalone context when they speak.

As Barack Obama has learned (all too well), words taken out of context and immediately broadcast through traditional and online media can be dangerous.

His experience of recent weeks -- think "lipstick on a pig" -- shows that candidates, have to be more than just "politically correct" at all times to avoid misunderstandings. In today's sound-bite culture, there is little room for explanation but plenty of room for debate. Yet the requirement for candidates to self-censor defeats the purpose of political debate and truly limits our ability to assess a candidate clearly. We come out on the losing end of the deal.

No one wants a political candidate to be so careful on the stump that voters lose the ability to evaluate his or her true character -- no more than a company that so closely parses its words and message. As suggested by Lee Iacocca in his latest book, Where Have All the Leaders Gone?, we might just as well require candidates to submit all views in writing, with voting contingent upon readership.

This trend is a lose/lose proposition for all Americans. Since political foes will relentlessly try to bash their opponents, the only possible remedy is for the media to resist the temptation to use only the sound bite and go for the complete story that only thorough reporting can produce. This means covering a candidate's actual voting records, accomplishments, and specific objectives rather than depending upon the press releases of an opposing camp.

As sound bites get shorter and shorter, it will take the news media a strong spine to work towards presenting a story in its fullest context. It's a great deal to ask but without it, we have much more to lose.