Mr. Media Training

As this blog’s regular readers know, I highlight the five worst video media disasters at the end of every month.

But something strange happened this month. For the first time, it proved impossible to reduce the list to just five disasters. Too many public figures self-immolated in spectacular fashion, and it would be plain irresponsible for me to exclude them from this list.

So this month, I’ll feature November’s eight worst video media disasters!

Without any further ado, here are the eight worst video media disasters of November!

#8: Liberal Host Bill Press Equates Jerry Sandusky with Herman Cain

I used to work with Bill Press at CNN and always liked him. But he was totally wrong this month when he said there’s “no difference” between Jerry Sandusky, the alleged Penn State serial child rapist, and Herman Cain, who allegedly sexually harassed several women. Sexual harassment is serious and has potentially devastating impacts on the victims – but most people would agree that serial child rape is much more serious than the allegations leveled against Mr. Cain. 

#7: Herman Cain Spokesman Dodges and Weaves

As every media spokesperson knows, it’s important to have a message and transition to it as often as possible. But Herman Cain spokesperson J.D. Gordon took that too far when he spoke with the Fox News Channel’s Geraldo Rivera about accusations of sexual harassment against Mr. Cain. Mr. Gordon refused to answer Mr. Rivera’s direct question, “Are you denying there was a cash settlement?” numerous times, leading Mr. Rivera to scold him and ask to speak directly with Mr. Cain.

#6: Child Abusing Judge Blames Daughter For Her Own Abuse

When a seven-minute video showing a father mercilessly beating his daughter surfaced earlier this month, the father – a Texas family court judge – downplayed the abuse. Making matters worse, the father (Judge William Adams), blamed his daughter for his violent outbursts. During a television interview, he tried to appear sympathetic, telling a television reporter, “As you can see, my life’s been made very difficult over all of this.” Sadly, the statute of limitations on his abuse has expired. Happily, he’s been suspended as a judge, his sociopathic behavior exposed to the world.

#5 : Jimmy Fallon’s Band Disses Michele Bachmann

When GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann appeared on Jimmy Fallon’s late night talk show, the house band chose a song called “Lyin’ Ass Bitch” for her intro music. The band’s leader, Questlove, was not suspended for his profane and inappropriate song choice (Mr. Fallon claims he didn’t know about his band’s choice until after the show aired). Although Mr. Fallon later apologized, his show’s failure to punish Questlove calls into question whether the apology was offered out of obligation or sincerity.

Click here to see part two, with the four worst media disasters of the month.

Don’t miss a single gaffe! Please follow me on Twitter at @MrMediaTraining and on Facebook at www.Facebook.com/MrMediaTraining.

Republican Debate Scorecard: Who Gets The Highest (and Lowest) Grades For Debating Skills So Far?

World’s Most Visited Media Training Website Ranks Candidates’ Debate Performance In First Ten Debates

November 29, 2011 (Washington, DC) – Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the best debaters in the Republican field, while Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry rank among the worst, according to a detailed analysis of ten Republican debates held between May and November 2011.

To help determine the winners and losers, the candidates were ranked using seven specific communications criteria – including clarity of message, optimism of message, and charisma – that have accurately predicted the winners of every general election since the beginning of the 24/7 media age in 1980.

The 10,000-word series appears on the Mr. Media Training Blog (www.MrMediaTraining.com), the world’s most visited media training website. The blog’s author, Brad Phillips, was formerly a journalist with ABC News and CNN. Here are the rankings:

First Place: Mitt Romney (B+) Gov. Romney has been the most consistent debater thus far. He has easily deflected his opponents’ attacks, proving himself to be a “Teflon” candidate to whom nothing sticks. He has demonstrated a mastery of public policy and shown toughness as a debater. The Republican base may not love him, but they have to concede he would fare well in next fall’s debates against President Obama.

Second Place: Newt Gingrich (B) Speaker Gingrich propelled himself to the top of the Republican pack primarily through his strong debate performances, during which he often castigated the mainstream media. Like Romney, he has demonstrated his policy mastery. Unlike Romney, his propensity to go off-script leaves open the question of whether he’s a more disciplined politician than he was in the 1990s.

Third Place: Michele Bachmann (B-) Rep. Bachmann, who briefly flirted with the lead, has shown an impressive ability to articulate an unambiguous message throughout the debates (ObamaCare bad, repeal good). She has also demonstrated a skillful ability to attack her opponents directly without ever appearing nasty. Still, she falls off-script too often, such as when she said after one debate that the HPV vaccine caused “mental retardation.”

Fourth Place: Herman Cain (C+) Mr. Cain dominated the storyline in several early debates with his “9-9-9” plan; no other candidate offered such a memorable proposal. Mr. Cain’s ability to offer a well-timed one-liner helped make him a crowd favorite. But recent debates about foreign policy have revealed his superficial knowledge of international affairs and will likely hasten his decline in the polls.

Fifth Place, Tied: Ron Paul (C) Rep. Paul is the most ideologically consistent of anyone in the field, and is unafraid to defend his views – many of which are unpopular with the GOP base. Still, he too often comes across as lecturing and strident, and hasn’t made the personal connection that will help him expand his reach beyond his relatively small but deeply loyal base.

Fifth Place, Tied: Rick Santorum (C) Sen. Santorum is passionate, but conveys that passion with an ever-present sour expression. Mr. Santorum has launched a few effective attacks on his opponents. But whereas Ronald Reagan used to eviscerate his opponents with a warm smile, Mr. Santorum looks thoroughly disgusted with his opponents. There’s a reason Mr. Santorum hasn’t moved in the polls, and it’s that Americans express a clear preference for sunnier candidates.

Fifth Place, Tied: Rick Perry (C) During the debate held on November 9, Gov. Perry committed one of the worst debate gaffes in memory when he struggled for 43 seconds to identify the third of three government agencies he pledged to eliminate. He never remembered it, ending his answer with a lame, “Oops.” Mr. Perry has careened between too hot and too cold, unable to settle on the right tone. His halting speaking style, filled with long pauses during which he struggles to find the next phrase, makes him hard to watch. But for a strong first debate, Perry would have ranked lower.

Eighth Place, Jon Huntsman (C-) Gov. Huntsman’s debate performances were mostly memorable for his frequent (and failed) attempts at humor. Whether making a joke invoking Kurt Cobain or the “gas” coming from Washington, Mr. Huntsman too often resembled the awkward uncle who elicits sympathy laughs at family events. Still, Mr. Huntsman may be someone to look out for. His last debate performance was by far his strongest, and that makes him the most improved debater in the field.

“This season’s many debates have given Republican voters a clear sense of which candidates would square off most effectively against President Obama,” said Brad Phillips, author of the Mr. Media Training Blog. “That matters, as the more charismatic general election candidate with the clearer message has won the presidency in every election since the beginning of the 24/7 media age in 1980.”

###

Brad Phillips is the author of the Mr. Media Training Blog (www.MrMediaTraining.com), the world’s most visited media training website. He is the president of Phillips Media Relations, a media and presentation training firm with offices in NYC and Washington, DC. Mr. Phillips previously worked as a journalist with ABC’s Nightline with Ted Koppel and CNN’s Reliable Sources and The Capital Gang.

MEDIA INTERVIEW REQUESTS:

Brad Phillips, Contact@MrMediaTraining.com

FULL DEBATE REVIEWS:

Below, you will find links to the scorecards for each debate:

November 22, 2011

November 9, 2011

October 18, 2011

October 11, 2011

September 22, 2011

September 12, 2011

September 7, 2011 

August 11, 2011 

June 13, 2011

May 5, 2011

Note: This is a guest post from Marcia Yudkin, author of the new Kindle ebook, The Sound Bite Workbook. I’ve read it, and can tell you it’s a steal at $2.99. You can download it here.

On camera, on the phone or in person, sound bites often make the difference between an interview featured on the evening news or the front page and exchanges with reporters that end up in the waste basket. Unless you’re uncommonly quick-tongued, you need to think up sound bites in advance and toss them into your interview at the appropriate moment.

Everyone in journalism – and the general public too – recognizes a terrific sound bite when they hear it. It grabs the ear and the mind. It sticks in memory because it contains compressed meaning with an element of surprise. A great sound bite is fresh, frisky and fun to repeat.

Here are five techniques for constructing memorable sound bites:

A delectable sound bite will have reporters eating out of your hands

1. Triples: Remember “Veni, vidi, vici” (“I came, I saw, I conquered”) from high school Latin? Or “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” from the Declaration of Independence? Many people do. That’s because the human mind likes threes. Make a list of keywords for your subject matter and look for catchy triplet combinations. For instance, if you’re a financial planner, you could tell a reporter that you “help ordinary people get rich without working on Wall Street, inheriting wealth or marrying a millionaire.”

2. Clever Mnemonic: Some schoolkids remember the structure of our solar system with a little ditty in which the first letter of each word corresponds to a planet: “My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Noodles.” Make up an interesting pattern like this for a well-known set of initials, such as “We tell our clients that in our firm, ‘CPA’ stands for ‘Court Prosperity Avidly.’”

3. Unexpected Metaphors: Compare your quest, cause or issue to something familiar, using words that relate the abstraction to a specific, wry situation in real life. On NPR’s Marketplace show recently, I heard Howard Gleckman of the Tax Policy Center say, “It’s as if Republicans and Democrats are planning a trip but they disagree over whether you should start the trip from Buenos Aires or from Greenland.” That’s much more luscious than simply “…start the trip from Point A or Point B” because the geographical disparity of Buenos Aires and Greenland takes a moment to register, then explodes pleasurably in the mind.

These ideas - and more - can be found in this ebook

4. Contrast, Conflict or Paradox: Advertising tag lines often combine opposites or near-opposites in ironic, attention-getting ways, as in “Our food is fresh. Our customers are spoiled” (online grocer FreshDirect) or “Melts in your mouth, not in your hands” (M&M candy). You can do the same by brainstorming words and ideas for your theme, then looking for contraries like local/national, full/empty, funny/serious, up/down, etc., and building something catchy out of it.

5. Rhymes: We normally associate corny verses with greeting cards or jump-rope chants. But Johnny Cochran’s irresistible courtroom concoction, “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit,” had an undeniably serious impact in a notorious murder case. Muhammad Ali is one public figure who used rhyming to get quoted, explaining his boxing strategy as “I outwit them and then I out-hit them.” You may need to grin as you deliver a rhymed sound bite, and the reporter or talk-show host may groan, but chances are it’ll get passed along.

As Mark Twain (one of the most quoted authors ever) wrote, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug.” For you, tweaking a rough idea into a tight, bright arrangement of words can turn a so-so sound bite into a sensational one. Pay attention to alliteration (repeated initial letters) and rhythm as you twist your phrase or sentence into its time – and yours – in the limelight.

Marcia Yudkin is Head Stork of Named At Last, as well as the author of Publicity Tactics, 6 Steps to Free Publicity and the new Kindle ebook, The Sound Bite Workbook.

Have the best of the blog delivered to your inbox twice per month! Enter your name in the box on the upper right of the blog to join our mailing list.

For this long Thanksgiving holiday weekend, I offer you one of my favorite video clips.

Shortly after returning to Alaska following her defeat in the 2008 general election, then-Governor Sarah Palin visited a local turkey farm to pardon a turkey.

She was totally oblivious to the bloody turkey slaughter occurring over her shoulder.

I suggest you watch the entire clip – the final sentence is a gem.

It’s hard to know whether the camera operator who set up that interview did so on purpose. But it’s the job of a spokesperson – or a spokesperson’s staffers – to ensure that the background doesn’t detract from the message.

Although Ms. Palin’s gaffe makes for a compelling video, she’s far from alone in failing to check her background.

When launching his network’s new brand last year, MSNBC head Phil Griffin shot a promo – with CNN playing in the background:

So remember this Thanksgiving lesson: If you’re about to do a television interview, look behind you to see what the audience will see. If it’s something potentially embarrassing, ask the producer to change the shot or allow you to stand somewhere else. And if you’re ever engulfed in a crisis, don’t stand anywhere near your company’s logo; if you do, you’ll only reinforce visually that your brand is connected to an unfortunate scandal.

I wish you and your family a happy, healthy, and restorative Thanksgiving weekend! See you back here on Monday, November 28th. And thank you, as always, for visiting the blog.

Don’t click away quite yet! Why not take a moment to follow our latest stories on Twitter here and on Facebook here?

The leader board for the Republican nomination has changed more often than Mitt Romney’s policy positions.

Over the past six months, Mitt Romney, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and now Newt Gingrich have all led the Republican field.

But the main story tonight wasn’t Newt Gingrich’s sudden rise to the top of the polls. Rather, it was the significant amount of airtime the so-called second-tier candidates received, namely Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman. Both made the most of their chances.

Here are tonight’s grades, in order of best to worst:

THE TOP TIER

JON HUNTSMAN (1st Place, Grade: A)

I never thought Gov. Huntsman would land at the top of my debate scorecard, but he had a good night.

Instead of making lame jokes in this debate (or doing anything to evoke last Saturday’s dreadful Saturday Night Live appearance), Mr. Huntsman made the most of the significant airtime he was offered in this debate.

He was more focused tonight, looking both tougher and more serious than in earlier debates. He made his most genuine connection with the live audience to date, regularly eliciting cheers and applause for his answers. He also stood up well when Mitt Romney attacked one of his points, showing more backbone in a debate than he has thus far. 

As a former diplomat, Mr. Huntsman still has a propensity to utter too many carefully calibrated words before getting to his point – but he gained strength as the debate continued, and he emerges as tonight’s winner.

RON PAUL (2nd Place, Grade: A-)

Okay, Ron Paul fans. I’ve been hard on Dr. Paul through the debate season. No one as un-telegenic has won a general election since the dawn of television, and his delivery evokes The Simpsons’  Montgomery Burns more than a serious presidential candidate.

But Rep. Paul had a terrific night, and made the most of the extra airtime he was afforded in this debate. Instead of merely appearing strident, Dr. Paul made his points with a bit of humor, bewilderment, and bemusement. He held his own in a tough exchange against Newt Gingrich, standing his ground while remaining amiable.

His comments on Israel will likely make some headlines tomorrow, as he’s the only candidate not to offer almost unequivocal military support to the critical American ally. 

MICHELE BACHMANN (3rd Place, Grade: B+)

If someone had told me I’d be ranking the candidates in this order tonight, I would have told them to turn their sheet of paper upside down. But I call ‘em like I see ‘em, and Rep. Bachmann had a good night.

Ms. Bachmann has perfected the art of taking shots at her fellow candidates with a smile. She called Rick Perry out for being “naïve” on aid to Pakistan, and directly challenged Newt Gingrich on immigration. She may not have landed a knock-out blow to either, but she reasserted herself with a demonstration of the political skills that briefly allowed her to flirt with the lead. She also demonstrated an impressive knowledge of foreign policy.

Ms. Bachmann may not gain much ground as a result of this debate, but she likely encouraged her supporters with tonight’s performance.

MIDDLE OF THE PACK

NEWT GINGRICH (4th Place, tie, Grade: B)

Tonight introduced the newer, gentler, frontrunner version of Newt Gingrich. The former House Speaker didn’t bring the same antagonism toward the media or his questioners as he has in virtually every other debate tonight, meaning he disappeared into the background a bit tonight.

That’s not to say he didn’t have another solid debate performance – he did. He offered a terrific answer early on regarding Timothy McVeigh, for example, eliciting cheers from the crowd.

It will be interesting to see how his answer regarding illegal immigration plays with the GOP base. He said that if a person has been in the United States for 25 years and has deep roots into their communities, they should be able to stay in the country. That may sound obvious to most Americans, but the conservative base takes a hardline on immigration and may view his answer as support for a backdoor amnesty.

MITT ROMNEY (4th Place, tie Grade: B)

Early in the debate, Gov. Romney launched an aggressive attack on fellow candidate Jon Huntsman for his answer on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. Considering Gov. Huntsman’s low poll ratings, Mr. Romney’s condescending attack came across as an over-reaction. He later went after Ron Paul over budget cuts.

Mr. Romney’s tone has become one of almost permanent “Why am I here” annoyance, and he’s at his least appealing when he presents himself that way. It makes him appear frustrated that he hasn’t been able to break through into a clear lead.

Still, Mr. Romney knows his facts and knows how to win an argument. For example, he got the better of Ron Paul in his answer about defense cuts. 

Tonight’s performance will likely leave the needle unchanged for Romney, who has struggled to break the 25 percent mark in Republican polls.

TRAILING THE FIELD

RICK SANTORUM (6th Place, Grade: C)

There’s little new to say about Rick Santorum. He’s passionate and knowledgeable, but also sour and strident. He hasn’t grown as a candidate or a debater, and he’ll be one of only a few candidates never to have had a shot at or near the lead. Tonight once again showed why.

Many people are also commenting on Sen. Santorum’s “gaffe,” in which he called Africa a country (it’s a continent). I have little doubt Mr. Santorum knows the difference, and don’t think it’s revelatory of any deeper lack of understanding. Slips of the tongue happen, and this one is no big deal.

RICK PERRY (7th Place, Grade: C-)

I could comment here on Gov. Perry’s halting answers, distractingly sweaty upper lip, or his bizarre opening statement about his wife (it was supposed to be about foreign policy).

The truth is, none of that really matters. Mr. Perry’s tone was better-calibrated tonight, but he didn’t make a dent in this debate. He may have stopped the bleeding from his “oops” moment two weeks ago, but he flirted with utter irrelevance in tonight’s debate, which will likely do little to calm his nervous donors.

HERMAN CAIN (8th Place, Grade: D-)

Remember that Happy Days episode when Fonzie jumped the shark? This debate was that episode for Herman Cain.

Foreign policy is undoubtedly Mr. Cain’s kryptonite (well, that, plus former female employees). A candidate can hide behind empty bluster for only so long before his policy ignorance is exposed; tonight was the night it was. There are many reasons to bomb Iran (or not), for example, but Mr. Cain seemed enamored with the idea that we couldn’t bomb it primarily because it is too mountainous.

Mr. Cain couldn’t even get the moderator’s name right, referring to Wolf Blitzer as “Blitz.” This was a bad night for Mr. Cain, who will not get another shot at the top.

Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Related: November 9, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: October 18, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: October 11, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: September 22, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: September 12, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: September 7, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: August 11, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: June 13, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

Related: May 5, 2011 Republican Debate Scorecard

When promoting his upcoming singing competition “The X Factor” earlier this year, Simon Cowell boldly proclaimed that anything less than 20 million viewers per week would be a failure.

The most recent episode had just over nine million viewers. His show is a flop.

On paper, there’s not much difference between “American Idol” and “The X Factor.” Both shows have singing contestants with compelling back stories, both have had Simon Cowell and Paula Abdul as judges, and both have top-notch production.

There are two main differences. First, the chemistry among the judging panel is off – at times, the panelists appear to genuinely dislike one another. But more importantly, host Steve Jones is profoundly awful – think Rick Dees and Chevy Chase on late night bad.

It would be unfair to pin the show’s underwhelming performance solely on Steve Jones’s dreadful performance. But no other single factor is contributing as much to the show being virtually unwatchable.

The below clip doesn’t do justice to some of his worst moments (the show only makes a limited number of clips available), but it’s helpful if you haven’t seen him in action:

Here are at least three reasons Steve Jones is a miserable host:

1. He’s Not Having Any Fun: The judges regularly bicker with one another and rip on contestants  mercilessly. That’s bound to make the audience uncomfortable. But instead of diffusing the tension with a light and well-timed quip, Jones adds to the stress by looking anxious and uncomfortable. As a result, he makes the audience even more uncomfortable.

Mr. Jones began his career as a model. He knows how to smile, but if you’ve seen the show, you’d never believe it. He should look to his counterpart, American Idol’s Ryan Seacrest, who perfectly demonstrates the adage, “Never let them see you sweat.”

2. He’s Oddly Formal: It’s a singing competition, dude, not the first meeting with your future father-in-law. It’s hard to explain, for example, why Steve Jones calls the male contestants “sir.” There’s something odd about calling a 15-year-old hip hop artist named Astro “sir.” Charlie Rose is less formal when he interviews the Secretary of State.

3. He’s Not Connecting With The Contestants, The Judges, or The Audience: Mr. Jones has made virtually no on-air connection with anyone. When he interviews contestants who have just received bad reviews from the judges, for example, he’ll detachedly ask, “How do you feel?” before rushing them off stage with a hurried, “off you go.” It looks as if he’s so busy trying to keep track of all of the moving parts around him, that he’s unable to ever be fully in the moment and actually engage.

I rarely write about entertainment on this blog, and my strong critique of Mr. Jones may seem disproportionate to his crime as a lackluster host. But as a professional communicator, I can’t understand why Simon Cowell would have hired someone so clearly wrong for the job.

Mr. Cowell has only himself to blame for the show’s underperformance. If he wants to save his show for season two, he should start by replacing the host. I’d be glad to provide his replacement with some media training.

Follow our latest stories! Follow us on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/MrMediaTraining and like us on Facebook at www.Facebook.com/MrMediaTraining.

I regularly hear clients tell me that a reporter they have to work with is stupid. But are they really dumb, or just playing “dumb” to get more information?

That’s what reader Patricia Carlson wondered after reading my article, “Three Dangerous Types of Reporters,” which omitted the “dumb” reporter as a dangerous type. She wrote:

“I’m not sure if this would fall under a ‘dangerous reporter’ or ‘dangerous tactics’ headline, but I’ve witnessed the “playing dumb” reporter on many occasions. I’m told there are several reasons why a reporter would use this routine but I’m wondering what your take is on it?”

There are three primary reasons a reporter might come across as dumb.

Be careful. This reporter may not be as dumb as he looks.

1. They’re Trying To Get You To Say More

A reporter might say, “I’m sorry, I don’t understand” as a device to keep you talking. As we tell our trainees, the more you say, the more you stray. If a reporter can keep you talking, they can increase the odds that you’re going to say something you’ll regret.

Don’t fall for it. Ask reporters what, specifically, they don’t understand and clear up those misunderstandings. But remember that your primary job isn’t to download a semester’s worth of education to the reporter – it’s to get the quotes and the storyline you want without saying something that strays from your message.  

2. You’re Not Saying It Right

Reporters might say, “I’m sorry, I don’t understand” as a way of getting you to speak without jargon. Technical, wonky words and ideas are difficult for the reporter to quote, since the audience won’t understand what you mean.

Here’s a trick from a former ABC News colleague to help you avoid jargon. She once interviewed a jargon-filled scientist. After 20 minutes, he still hadn’t said anything we could use on air. She ended the interview, thanked him, and said, “Could I ask you a favor? My 12-year-old nephew loves science. Would you mind doing one take I could show to him?” He agreed, and delivered a terrific answer without any jargon – and that’s the take we used that evening.

If you have young people in your life, run your messages by them. If they can paraphrase them back to you in their own words, you’ve successfully eliminated the jargon.

3. The Reporter Is Actually Dumb

A reporter might say, “I’m sorry, I don’t understand” because he or she is just plain dumb. Every field has its dummies, and journalism is no different. The reporter may not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier, and their apparent stupidity may be less journalistic tactic than biological trait.

Still, don’t give up. That’s a great opportunity for you to practice making your message as clear as possible. As I wrote in an earlier post, “Don’t Dumb It Down, Just Make It Simpler,” you should remember this admonition from Albert Einstein: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

Have the best of the blog delivered to your inbox twice per month! Enter your name in the box on the upper right of the blog to join our mailing list.

Remember the old game show Let’s Make a Deal?

During the program, host Monty Hall regularly asked contestants to make a choice: They could choose what was behind door number one, door number two, or door number three. If they chose correctly, they might walk away with a new car. If they didn’t, they might end up “winning” a live turkey.

The Let’s Make a Deal analogy holds in the context of media interviews. If a reporter asks you a multiple choice question and you answer it correctly, you’ll win by avoiding an off-message headline. But if you answer it incorrectly, you’ll deliver an off-message answer – which the media will love and replay repeatedly.

The way you “win” Let’s Make a Deal when a reporter asks you to select one of three doors is simple: Refuse to play. Select a fourth door that helps you convey your own message instead.

Earlier this week, CNN reporter Dan Lothian asked President Obama a multiple choice question. Asking about the Republican candidates’ support for waterboarding, he asked:

“I’m wondering if you think they’re uninformed, out-of-touch, or irresponsible?”

President Obama paused for four long seconds before responding:

“That’s a multiple choice question, isn’t it? Let me just say this: They’re wrong.”

President Obama handled that in exactly the right way, refusing to accept any of the reporter’s three choices and using his own word instead. (Still, I’m a bit surprised that Mr. Obama appeared flat-footed for several seconds – this can’t be the first time he’s encountered a multiple choice question.)

If you’re put on the spot by a reporter’s multiple choice question, tell the reporter you would characterize it differently, and then answer the question using your own words.

Otherwise, you may find yourself picking one of the three answers the reporter offers – and walking home with a live turkey.

Queen’s Freddie Mercury would have said that you’re my best friend. I’ll settle for just being liked.  Please like me on Facebook to keep up with our latest public speaking and media interviewing tips!