By Stephen Macaulay

One of the knocks against Kamala Harris thus far is that she hasn’t participated in interviews with legacy news organizations. Arguably she hasn’t participated in any interviews with new media organizations, either.

But the likes of the Times and the Post and NBC and ABC treat this like not merely an affront to the people’s need to know, but to their fundamental importance to the polity.

So Harris’ ghosting their conference rooms is something that they repeat. Just like Donald Trump.

They treat it like she doesn’t respect them. He clearly doesn’t respect her. 

In the case of Them it is interesting that there was less angst and anguish over the fact that Trump didn’t give his first press conference this year until August 8, a couple weeks after Biden dropped out of the race.

The day Biden dropped out, July 21, Harris announced she was running. Trump announced he was running for president on November 15, 2022. So if we take the Trump metric of 633 days, Harris has until April 14, 2026.

This is not to say that I don’t think it is a good thing for her not to talk to the media. She should.

But it is to say that those legacy organizations need to understand that their editorial boards are not quite as influential as they once were. For example, about 36% of the U.S. population is between the ages of 18 and 44 and there are probably more than a few of them who never consult the legacies. Never.

According to a recent article in The Drum, a publication that follows the media (old and new), “During this election cycle, digital is expected to attract $3.46bn in spend, or about 28% of total spend in the cycle.”

That means, of course, that 72% is not being spent on digital.

But then The Drum goes on to point out this about the $3.46bn spend: “This represents a 156% uptick from 2020 levels.”

Few things go up 156% in four years. And if it scales that way, come 2028. . . .

Team Harris knows where the money should be directed. And, of course, Team Trump likes to keep things close, so there’s always lots of advertising space available on Truth Social.

This, of course, isn’t about ad spending. It is about communicating.

To what extent do politicians, especially those going for the highest offices, “owe” the public something more than “I’m _________________ and I approve this message”?

I’d submit a lot.

And not only during campaigns. And not only to accredited media.

Consider the Prime Minister’s Questions in the UK. Every Wednesday when the House of Commons is sitting the Prime Minister shows up at Westminster and takes questions for about 30 minutes. Not only does that show what the PM knows and thinks, but it also does the same for the House members.

But of course, this is after the people in question have been elected to office and the concern here is Harris’ so-far resistance to a sit-down interview with Lester Holt or Maggie Haberman or whomever.

While this will certainly happen between now and the election, its importance is in inverse relation to the concern expressed about it.