Any time a politician does something in public, suspicion arises from voters and reporters. What if said politician is just doing this for good P.R.? Every politician running for the presidency visits famous landmarks on the campaign trail and every potential first spouse makes a joke about that other spouses can relate to, such as "oh, [my spouse] just wants to watch Sports all the time! Don't get me started!"
Last week, the Media and Politics class that I am writing this blog for took a trip to Washington, D.C., where were lucky enough to meet with ABC news reporter Sunlen Miller, among others.
Mrs. Miller, who spent three and a half years covering Barrack Obama on the campaign trail and during his first term occupying the presidency, shared a story of President Obama presenting her with a cake on her thirtieth birthday, her fourth birthday spent reporting on the President. A friend of mine from the same class did some research after the trip and found a video and article reporting on the incident, written by Mrs. Miller, linked below.
This presentation of a tradition falls under a smaller niche of catering: to the press and not the public. Or does it? Does presenting Mrs. Miller undermine her credibility? Because she reported on the incident, I would confidently say "no," but the presentation of Birthday cakes, to and by public figures, is a specific action that happens quite often, and humanizes the candidate favorably, highlighting reliable aspects of their character and not necessarily their policy.
As the CBS coverage reports, after receiving her cake, "Miller asked the president if he had any comment about the budget and he said no. He left afterward." (see link above)
When Mrs. Miller explained to my Media and Politics class why the President left, she explained that he had given her a birthday cake as a personal gesture, not a political one, and this is why he did not comment.
But in a twenty-four-hour news cycle, is their such thing as a personal gesture for a politician?
Insider Syndrome (or as others might call it, Stockholm Syndrome) refers to the crisis a reporter or individual may find themselves in when they are thrust into the story they are covering at a level that may change their decisions on what to leave out of the story for fear of compromising the exclusive club that they've gained access to.
Representative Ben Quail described President Ronald Reagan's beloved Jelly Beans as "much more than a sweet treat that he gave out as gifts. They represented the uniqueness and greatness of America — each one different and special in its own way, but collectively they blended in harmony."
And so the Jelly Beans are "much more," and every day actions such as eating become a speech of their own. As the New York Times mentioned in reportage on Mitt Romney's love for his wife's traditional 'Meat Loaf Cakes,' one-time Presidential hopeful(and current Secretary of State) John Kerry was the subject of much criticism when he ordered a cheesesteak in Philadelphia with Swiss Cheese (instead of "wit Wizz".) This quickly became, as the Times said in the same article, "a moment that was used to portray him as out of touch with the common man."
Mitt Romney's Meat Loaf Cakes were described by the New York Times as a mixture of "Brown Sugar and Ketchup," with emphasis placed on the "tradition" of Governor Romney eating the meal on his birthday.
Also, the name 'Meat Loaf Cakes' sounds like it came from the Oregon Trail computer game, or even the actual Oregon Trail. But maybe that's just me.
I am not saying that these food choices and/or presentations sell citizens or reporters on any candidate or their policy one-hundred percent, but I am saying that that is their goal. It's hard to stay honest reporting on policy and political decisions when you think you know the person. The 'person' in a politician, to any 'fair and balanced' reporter, is not behind the cake. That's a guy campaigning for your vote and your bias.
Let's be honest, food all goes to the same place, anyway.
