Politics: Neal on the Art of Not Answering a Question

[Tiassa]

I raised my hand and asked Clark to clarify recent comments he made that seemed to suggest he would eliminate the military's "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy. He told the Advocate magazine: "The armed forces are the last institution in America that discriminates against people. It ought to be the first that doesn't. They ought to have the right to be who they are. They shouldn't have to conceal their identities."

Clark danced around the issue, saying "there are too many examples of [the policy] not working." He said he would ask military leaders to study whether it was possible to "get a policy that represents America."

But he refused to answer the question with a simple "yes" or "no" answer.

This is an old tactic they teach in Public Relations 101. It's called: Answer the Question You Wish You Were Asked. It is the basic tenet of staying on message. Inevitably, some Clark supporters will accuse reporters of picking on the general, as if trying to clarify a presidential candidate's position on abortion and gays in the military makes one a big old meanie.

But the same standard applied to candidate George W. Bush in 2000. (Terry Neal, Washington Post, January 22, 2004)

• Read up, folks.
• Terry Neal's column is pretty much a blog, even though the Post avoids calling it one. This particular dispatch is dated January 22, 2004, and stamped at 1:26 pm, though I don't know if that's Eastern time or adapted to Pacific.

"Answering WYWA" (what you Wish You Were Asked) actually used to be a proactive, positive tool in comunicating important messages. People don't always know what questions to ask, and oftentimes if you answer what they actually ask you with their words, they will be disappointed.

However, the Pundit Era changes the nature of WYWA by making it a defensive tool, and, as indicated by Neal's "big old meanie" reference, often something negative.

And let's face it: A simple "yes" or "no" answer is going to be vague enough for the pundits to pick apart all day in order to create distracting issues. The General might wish to consider making it possible to add to his position statements, "Go see my website."

Never know ... it just might work, General.

But in answering WYWA, the candidate exercises an illusion of control, creating an opportunity to expound either proactively and positively, or else negatively, in their own context. WYWA creates a sense of control over the punditry, and excuse me, please, if I'm under the impression that the pundits are none too happy about this.

And if a layer of allegory applicable to Sciforums isn't staring you in the face, look again. (That's the secondary comment, but a compelling issue nonetheless. Take notes, folks; Neal ain't telling us anything new.)

• Neal, Terry. "Primary Dispatches." Washington Post, January 22, 2004. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/elections/2004/primarydispatches/

 

[Undecided]

Clark is constantly avoiding questions, like the time he refused answer almost anything of substance on inside politics, it was disgusting to say the least. To me Clark is not a very good politician nor is he something I think understands it all, he lacks the gestalt perspective, which plagues GWB as well. The thing Clark should do is either be a VP candidate under Kerry, or Dean...

 

[Mr. G]

AWYWYWA

Tiassa revealed. None is more relevent than the T's.