Three Dimensional Checkers
It's politics, not rocket science.
There are three ways to look at presidential campaigns.
There’s the normal way, which is to read, watch the news and do your research, which is what most Americans do.
There’s the professional, insiders way, which is to know all the players both personally and professionally, pick your winners and losers, package your choices as journalism and distribute it to the masses (see above). This might not be the best way to report on things, but it makes the carpools much less awkward.
Then there’s the third way, which is to intently observe those running for office and make pictures that somehow reveal to the viewer who these people really are. That’s what us photojournalists, in theory, try to do.
Campaign photography is challenging, imperfect and filled with compromise, but on the rare occasions when it’s done right, it is magical.
When you’re inside a campaign someone else decides everything for you, the venue, where you stand, the light you use, the foreground, background and whether or not balloons will be involved are all outside of your control. You don’t even get to choose the food you eat or the amount of sleep you get.
On the campaign, everybody you interact with has an angle to spin and the people doing the most spinning hold all the cards.
Still, just because they may control the menu, doesn’t mean they can force you to swallow any of it.
That’s where both photo and journalism lives. The obstacles, the level of difficulty, just make the successful images that much sweeter. They've worked very hard and spent a lot of money to advance their narrative. There’s a victory in making an image (and getting it published) that doesn’t meet their goals.
It’s not that I’m cynical, honest. It’s just that when I think of politics, I imagine a long table covered in a checker style board covered with red and blue pieces. This table has a lot more squares than a normal checkerboard and there’s something like a dozen players sitting on either side and they’re all moving pieces at the same time. You’d recognize some of the names, but not all of them. Naturally, the two sides are playing against each other, but they’re playing against the people sitting on their side of the table as well. Which means, whatever move they can make, whether they screw up players on their own side or not, is fair game.
There might be two sides to the table, red and blue, but in reality it’s a Battle Royal.
To be sure, it’s brutal, chaotic and occasionally brilliant. The players are smart, but the game they’re playing isn’t. It’s still just checkers. The goal remains the same. Grab as many pieces as possible and get yourself kinged in the process.
One of the front runners in our current game is both desperate and overconfident. If they don’t win, they will likely do their best to take down all the players on their side of the table with them. This is equally true of the other front runner who is sitting across from them on the opposite side of the table.
Before you think too hard on that, remember this is a brutal, chaotic and (just) occasional brilliant game. The players are smart, but pride and hubris have a way of canceling that out. Throw narcissism into the mix (Can anyone who believes they should be president be anything but?) and all bets are off.
The only good politician is the one who’s constantly afraid of losing their job. That holds true whether you’re looking at this race through rose or violet colored glasses.
I’ve watched a lot of politics from the buffer zone and behind the blue curtain. I’ve got zero idea on how this one will play out.
For any political photographer to have a chance to show us what’s happening, they need to be insightful and gifted, but they also need to be properly financed. Though campaign photography is an important part of the story, it’s not the whole story.
The other part, the more important part, is the issues that will motivate voters to support one side or the other. The pollsters and campaign strategists will make sure the politicians mention these talking points, but to have a proper national conversation we need insightful and gifted people to show us what’s really happening out there, and they need to be well financed too (just like the campaigns).
Which news outlets are going to venture beyond The Beltway and spend the time and money it takes to document and report on our common, national concerns?
Which news outlets are going to spend the time and money it takes to properly document the campaign itself?
These are two separate things. One happens every four years, and the other happens much less frequently.
Here’s my bold prediction.
This will not be “the most important election of your lifetime”. The “Must See TV”, marketing, Seinfeld followed by Friends, is played out. We’re done with that, but this election will be the most interesting of our lifetimes.
Being with what we’ve all seen lately, that’s saying quite a bit.
Maybe being interesting is a better motivation for engagement than being important.
Who’s going to document it, both the campaign side and the country-side?
Who’s going to pay for it, curate it, coach up the photographers who witness it, and deliver us a really good first draft of this history we're fixing to experience?
Which media outlet, honest question, do you most trust to do this crucial job?
More voices, more eyeballs, not fewer, that’s the way to approach this beast of a story. There are talents out there who we need to hear from. That’s why The Curious Society exists. Sure, it’s about what they, the visionaries, discover and share with us, but it’s also about us. The people who want to be fully informed and engaged with their fellow citizens. We’re all in this together.
At The Curious Society, we’re working to be the answer to some of the questions I just asked. We need you to see what we’re doing. That’s why we are currently offering on premier issue for just the cost of postage. That’s seven bucks, cheap.