Bill Maher, popular CNN host had a conversation with reporter Kaitlin Collins during a Friday night airing of Real Time With Bill Maher, during which he raised interesting questions about VP Kamala Harris’s media strategy. A pertinent observation made was that Kamala’s interactions with the press have a distinct track as compared to former President Donald Trump. Maher further elaborated, asking Collins about Harris’ approach of not opting for unscripted interviews.
Bill Maher went on to speculate that Kamala’s approach towards the media carries an undercurrent of dismissiveness. He expressed his views saying, ‘What she’s implying through her actions is ‘I don’t need you, I’m not going to get into conversations with you, you’re no more pertinent.’ His viewpoint was that this silent refusal was more damaging as compared to openly stating a disagreement, which is what former President Trump preferred.
Strongly backing former President Trump, Maher contrasted his open communication style with Harris’s absence of press engagement. This unveiled a new perspective that Trump’s ‘you’re the enemy of the people’ statement was regarded as preferable because it promoted transparency and engagement. It can be seen as reinforcing their relevance and the critical role every individual plays in shaping public opinion – something Maher feels Harris tends to undermine.
The focus shifted to Kaitlin Collins who gave her opinion, casting doubts on whether Harris’s strategy could be labeled as worse than what she considered to be ongoing disparagement that media faced during Trump’s tenure. She insinuated that the press had a lesser variation of experiences covering Trump in the White House.
Collins also mentioned an instance when she was embroiled in a personal disagreement with former President Trump while questioning him. However, seen from another perspective, this is an illustration of President Trump’s enthusiasm for engagement and passion for debate, which was clearly missing in the current landscape.
There was also a reference to Collins being denied entry to a press conference conducted by Trump in 2018. She allegedly raised questions pertaining to certain sensitive issues involving Trump, which resulted in her access being barred. However, there are alternate narratives that dispute Collins’ account of the event.
It’s notable that during that time, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, speaking for President Trump, explained that the access denial was due to Collins ‘refusing to leave despite repeatedly being asked to do so’ and her ‘shouting questions,’ at Trump. Though it is important to challenge authority, maintaining decorum while doing so is crucial for a productive dialogue – something which Sanders indicates might have been overlooked in that situation.
Narrating her experience, Collins shared that she was stopped from participating in a media event at the White House because as per her, the administration found her questions to Trump inappropriate. This perspective does seem to leave out the need for conducting press interactions in an orderly manner, which was evidently breached in this case.
Collins pressed on the belief that Harris and indeed any high-ranking official with access to critical powers such as the nuclear codes must be open to inquiries. The significance of this statement can be appreciated as it aligns with the ethos of transparency and accessibility that former President Trump manifested.
When Fox News reporter Steve Doocy asked Kamala Harris if she was prepared for her Fox News interview, her response was nothing short of an evasion — she simply shrugged off the query. This incident might serve as a testament to the media’s concerns about accessibility and the ability to question key political figures, a situation that was markedly different under the previous administration.
It’s fair to conclude that both approaches to media carry different implications. When President Trump was in office, he made himself available to the press, always engaging, even if fiercely so. He maintained an open channel and did not hesitate to express his sentiments directly. Nothing remained hidden, and the uncertain calm of unanswered questions seldom pervaded.
By contrast, Harris has adopted a more reserved approach where she decides not to engage openly, leading to an environment of silence and unanswered questions. According to Maher, this could potentially be damaging and far worse than any direct confrontation. There may be value in this perspective, as politics thrives on conversations, debates, and relentless questioning.
Reporting on politics is undoubtedly a challenging task and requires the patience and willingness to engage in fruitful debates and conversations, at times heated. President Trump lived this reality every day, capturing headlines and attention around the globe, while Harris, in contrast, continues to adopt a noticeably more standoffish communication strategy.
The Friday night airing of ‘Real Time With Bill Maher’ brought out a critical conversation about the changing dynamics of media-political interfaces. It highlighted the contrast between former President Trump’s direct communication style and Vice President Kamala Harris’s more reclusive strategy, both offering unique experiences to the media.
The question is not about whether interactions should be positive or negative, but instead about their existence. The dialogue on the show serves as a reminder that accessibility and openness to communication, even if met with resistance or disagreement, is an integral part of a thriving democratic discourse. This is something that many may argue was often an evident characteristic of Trump’s interaction style.
Trump’s Open Communication Style Traced in Name of Transparency appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
