Gerald
09-09-11, 08:01 AM
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/7721/551724150036060621.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/684/551724150036060621.jpg/)
FDR's speeches are the benchmark, but few live up to them today.
For the last 15 years I've covered American presidents. That's 42, 43 and 44. From those three administrations I can remember precisely two speeches.
They are President Bush's second inaugural and candidate Barack Obama's speech on race. And to be totally honest I can't even remember them in great detail; it's more the flavour than the specific words that stay with me.
Now I have a really abysmal memory, but only two speeches in 15 years? Even I ought to be able to do better than that. If those speeches were so important, wouldn't I be able to recall them better? Which got me thinking (a little hopefully, perhaps). Maybe it's not my addled brain but the speeches themselves. Maybe presidential speeches are unmemorable because they don't have much lasting impact.
Changing times
Ever since the days of Franklin D Roosevelt's fireside chats we like to think words uttered from the most powerful man in the world will change history. After all, if the guy in the Oval Office can't bully his way out of the pulpit with nifty speeches, who can? Indeed, Roosevelt's 30 presidential radio addresses really did change events. Historians now credit much of the success of the New Deal with both the content and the delivery of Roosevelt's evening chats.
But times have changed, and so have we journalists.
We esteemed members of the fourth estate make a big deal of a set piece speech by an American president. We get reporters to cover the event, we schedule extra air time, pray for extra ads, and dissect every line for its "newsiness".
But maybe we're wrong. Presidents no longer change America by giving a great speech. They don't even shift the needle on public opinion in support of one policy or another.
"Grand promises notwithstanding, that speech did not mark a radical change in US policy... The meek, I'm sorry to say, are still scrapping over the crumbs of a measly inheritance”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/14795964
Note: 7 September 2011 Last updated at 23:38 GMT
FDR's speeches are the benchmark, but few live up to them today.
For the last 15 years I've covered American presidents. That's 42, 43 and 44. From those three administrations I can remember precisely two speeches.
They are President Bush's second inaugural and candidate Barack Obama's speech on race. And to be totally honest I can't even remember them in great detail; it's more the flavour than the specific words that stay with me.
Now I have a really abysmal memory, but only two speeches in 15 years? Even I ought to be able to do better than that. If those speeches were so important, wouldn't I be able to recall them better? Which got me thinking (a little hopefully, perhaps). Maybe it's not my addled brain but the speeches themselves. Maybe presidential speeches are unmemorable because they don't have much lasting impact.
Changing times
Ever since the days of Franklin D Roosevelt's fireside chats we like to think words uttered from the most powerful man in the world will change history. After all, if the guy in the Oval Office can't bully his way out of the pulpit with nifty speeches, who can? Indeed, Roosevelt's 30 presidential radio addresses really did change events. Historians now credit much of the success of the New Deal with both the content and the delivery of Roosevelt's evening chats.
But times have changed, and so have we journalists.
We esteemed members of the fourth estate make a big deal of a set piece speech by an American president. We get reporters to cover the event, we schedule extra air time, pray for extra ads, and dissect every line for its "newsiness".
But maybe we're wrong. Presidents no longer change America by giving a great speech. They don't even shift the needle on public opinion in support of one policy or another.
"Grand promises notwithstanding, that speech did not mark a radical change in US policy... The meek, I'm sorry to say, are still scrapping over the crumbs of a measly inheritance”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/14795964
Note: 7 September 2011 Last updated at 23:38 GMT