Arnold plays hardball on a softball circuit

Arnold Schwarzenegger has been rewriting the standard political scripts ever since he assumed the starring role in California’s recall campaign by announcing his candidacy on “The Tonight Show With Jay Leno.”

This week was no exception, as the Republican front-runner to replace Democratic Gov. Gray Davis racked up what amounted to a media grand slam -- sequential appearances on Oprah Winfrey’s syndicated daytime television show, Larry King’s prime-time cable program and Howard Stern’s morning rush-hour radio broadcast.

Schwarzenegger’s gubernatorial campaign is dealing with the media in an entirely novel and unforeseen way, almost completely shutting out experienced political journalists, while making their man available only in friendly forums -- right-wing talk radio and the congenial celebrity chat shows. Two questions arise: Will it work? And, if it does, can Arnold’s happy ending become a school for other candidates?

In conventional campaign terms, what occurred this week was a jaw-dropping achievement, the sort of unprecedented publicity triumph that leaves political rivals with nothing to do but stand and weep, and before which their preternaturally opinionated professional handlers can only sit and be silent.

“It’s quite extraordinary,” said veteran Democratic political strategist Bill Carrick. “You can sort of imagine something kind of like it, if he were a suddenly controversial nominee in a presidential campaign -- a la Bill and Hillary Clinton and their famous ’60 Minutes’ appearance. But I can’t think of another candidate for governor who would even get the time of day on these programs.”

Republican strategist and pollster Arnold Steinberg, who worked with Carrick on Richard Riordan’s second campaign for Los Angeles’ nonpartisan mayor’s office, agreed that “we’ve never seen anything like this and we won’t see it again.” To Steinberg, Schwarzenegger’s ability virtually to write his own ticket with the electronic media’s ratings elite derives from a unique confluence of circumstances: the candidate’s film star credentials, the novelty of the recall itself and the dramatic focus imposed by a compressed campaign.

“It’s a unique set of circumstances,” Steinberg said, “and I don’t think there are any transferable political lessons to be taken from it.”

Carrick and Steinberg also agreed that there is a clear precedent for the way Schwarzenegger’s campaign is being waged, though to find it, you have to look not to politics -- but to Hollywood. “I really think a lot of what we’re seeing has to do with his experience marketing movies,” Carrick said. “Just look at the way he moved across the marketing spectrum this week. If you want younger white men to vote for you, then you go on Howard Stern. If you’re after soccer moms, Oprah has them in her audience. Larry’s program gives you the middle of the market.”

All of this suggests to Carrick that “Arnold must have some genuinely hands-on influence over his campaign’s media strategy, because he is duplicating what has worked so often for him in the movie business. This time, he’s promoting his candidacy instead of a film.”

Steinberg believes that Schwarzenegger has capitalized shrewdly on another aspect of this marketing approach. “The hosts of these kinds of shows book the guests they do because they know that big celebrities drive up their ratings,” he said. “It’s commonplace when making these kinds of entertainment bookings for the guests to set conditions and limits on the kinds of things that can be asked -- in other words, no tough questions. That’s not the case with political reporters.

“Larry King is a notorious pitcher of softballs. The last time Arnold was on the Stern show, Howard asked whether he could watch him have sex with his wife. Since nothing similarly outrageous came up this time, I infer that some sort of agreement was reached in advance.”

Carrick concurred: “It’s in the nature of Oprah and Larry that they do friendly shows. It’s what their viewers expect. Neither one of them has what you’d call a slashing interview style. These folks don’t come from the Mike Wallace school of journalism. They do conversational television where you talk about personalities and feelings.”

So, will all this work?

Both analysts agree that the answer will be determined, in some large measure, by turnout.

If it is small, the electorate will be comprised of the people pollsters call “likely voters,” what Hollywood might term “the usual suspects.” They are more partisan than the population at large, more attentive to political journalism and, therefore, more likely to share its practitioners’ frustration with Schwarzenegger’s elusiveness.

If, on the other hand, the recall brings out voters who don’t usually exercise their franchise, other rules may apply.

“The idea that most people discriminate between so-called serious -- or what some might call boring -- media and the softer Larry King-Oprah Winfrey stuff, isn’t true,” said Carrick.

“Most people consider what they see on those programs as just information. Most people today are suspicious of institutional filters, including so-called serious journalism. They think they’re getting direct access through Larry and Oprah, and, in fact, they think that information is more valid than having reporters tell them what Arnold did or did not say.

“These programs are advantageous to him not only in the sense that he doesn’t have to answer hard questions, but also in the sense that their audience doesn’t care.”

Steinberg faults the conventional political press for not finding more aggressive ways to pose tough questions. He pointed out that while most of the candidates were debating in Hollywood this week, Schwarzenegger was virtually across the street taping Larry King’s show at CNN’s Sunset Boulevard studios.

“None of the reporters and camera crews there for the debate even bothered to go across the street and hassle him with shouted questions,” Steinberg said.

“Schwarzenegger’s strategy requires a docile news media, and he’s getting one.”