Kamala Harris, the present Vice President, and definitive Democratic nominee for presidency has achieved the remarkable feat of spending 72 consecutive days without holding a press briefing. While Trump, in the past, utilized press conferences to lively discuss issues like crime, immigration, and inflation, Harris seems to be practicing a new form of press politics — silence. Her lack of media engagement is seen particularly glaring in light of Trump’s proactive engagement as seen in his three press conferences all through last August alone, especially in California.
It is notable that this avoidance policy continued, even when she took the podium opposite Trump for a debate at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia on September 10, 2024. Critics argue that this tactic not only undermines the institution of democratic transparency, but it also exposes Harris’s apparent disinterest in directly answering the hard-hitting questions from the press.
True, Harris seems to have increased her media presence off late via various radio programs and a solitary interview with a Philadelphia TV channel. Yet, the key question remains as to when she will finally step forward and boldly address the nation through a formal press conference. Pessimistic predictions suggest that day might never arrive as long as she maintains her stance as a candidate.
Jorge Bonilla, from the Conservative Radio Libre, insists that Harris should ideally hold a press conference. Yet, he ironically notes that it’s almost ‘irrelevant’, since she continually seems to evade any form of media scrutiny. Not just that, her deflection of accountability seems to be supported by the media, facilitating her unique strategy of maintaining the illusion of engagement while evading real interaction.
Such an evasive policy, as Bonilla pragmatically puts forward, enables Harris to uphold a ‘plexiglass basement’ strategy. This effectively allows her to maintain a fabricated image of activity while staying thoroughly unreachable to the press, a situation that negates the fundamental need for accountability in a healthy democracy. Bonilla’s assessment seems to be corroborated by her exclusive interview with a Philadelphia TV outlet where she delivered an answer that left much to be desired.
Critics argue that during this interview, her response regarding lowering prices, wherein she underscored her ‘middle-class’ roots, did little more than deflect from the issue at hand. Certainly, such evasion leaves the electorate with more questions about practicalities of her economic policies.
Harris’s interview response went viral where she seemed to deftly avoid answering a direct question on how she planned to bring down prices. Instead, she traipsed down memory lane, speaking about her modest background and neighborhood that was ‘Very proud of their lawn.’
She worked to paint a narrative around the ‘desire for dignity’ that all Americans should have. She expounded on how Americans are filled with ambitions, aspirations, and dreams. However, she pointed out that not everyone has access to the requisite resources necessary to realize these dreams.
These lofty ideals sound wonderfully evocative, but Harris failed to offer any concrete plans for building an ‘opportunity economy’ that would enable the average Joe to achieve these dreams. Critics argue that it left the audience with an empty feeling as the rhetoric felt hollow without a robust plan of action to back it up.
Regardless of the discourse on dreams, aspirations, and American work ethic, the conversation seemed to lack any substance. Critics believe that the actual strategies and definitive pathways needed to ensure that these dreams and ambitions become realities, were conspicuous in their absence.
Under these circumstances, it appears necessary for Harris to step forward and break her extended silence. Her refusal to hold a press conference serves only to signify a worrying lack of accountability on her part. This behavior is seen as neither democratic nor becoming of a presidential nominee.
An evasive media strategy, non-specific idealism, and a lack of robust economic solutions bring into question the transformative possibilities the Vice President voices. For her detractors, her media silence substantiates their concerns about her leadership style and her willingness to take on hard-hitting questions head on.
With this in mind, it’s clear that Harris needs to swiftly reassess her media blackout strategy. Addressing her public directly through a press conference could provide her an opportunity to substantiate her claims and rectify the perception of being non-communicative. However, given her track record until now, whether she would take such a step remains a matter of conjecture.