Molly Ball has a typically excellent article at TheAtlantic, profiling Republican spin guru Frank Luntz. In the 1990s, Luntz was the guy who told Republicans that they should rename the estate tax “the death tax.” Since then, he’s become a fixture of political media, synonymous with spin. He is a one-man-confirmation of all your most cynical fears about congressional politics.
The premise of Ball’s article is that Luntz has grown depressed and disheartened about the American public. I think the more surprising thing is that the man truly seems to believe that his techniques still work just fine. Consider:
“I spend more time with voters than anybody else,” Luntz says. “I do more focus groups than anybody else. I do more dial sessions than anybody else. I don’t know shit about anything, with the exception of what the American people think.”
Focus groups and dial sessions were the cutting edge of 1994. They’re laughably antiquated today. And what’s more, they were never a perfect approximation of public opinion. They’re useful-but-limited tools that reveal an imperfect artifact, which in turn can serve as a stand-in for public opinion.
Focus groups and dial sessions are technologies that can help you pick out particularly resonant phrases and images. They were excellent tools back when the 30-second attack ad was virtually the only messaging vehicle in town: (1) Run a focus group. (2) Find resonant language. (3) Produce a commercial. (4) Test it with some people. (5) Run the commercial. (6) Get paid crazy money. Sounds like a pretty sweet gig.
The problem for Frank Luntz isn’t that people have gotten “more contentious and argumentative”*. The problem is that his two nifty tools aren’t the only game in town anymore. We’ve realized that campaign ads are pretty weak persuasion tools. We’ve developed plenty of other outreach mechanisms (*cough* Analyst Institute *cough*) that don’t rely solely on Luntz’s preferred form of crafted talk. And we’re developing new techniques for gauging activated public opinion through social media and analytics.**
Luntz is a lot like the old school scouts in Moneyball. He “knows baseball,” and he knows it based on the same old techniques that he pioneered 20 years ago.
If he seems sad, it’s probably because he’s in denial about how the game has changed.
*I’ve just started reading Berry and Sobieraj’s new book, The Outrage Industry. I’m pretty sure they would argue that we have gotten more contentious and argumentative. I’m inclined to agree. But I find it hard to believe that’s the real problem Frank Luntz is facing.
**Which is the subject of the book manuscript that I’ll go back to working on as soon as I’m finished with this blog post.