Were there smiles?
How long and warm were the handshakes? How was the body language? How did Trump’s voice sound?
What White House door did the Israeli Prime Minister use to go in and see the President?
On - and on and on - went these and other questions from the American media as Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu arrived at the White House for his latest meeting with President Trump.
There are multiple examples of this kind of media scrutiny of the President and the Trump White House, where minor details are over-interpreted and become major obsessions, as the two leaders met.
Samples:
Former Envoy Sees Rift Between Trump, Netanyahu
With bold print for emphasis supplied, this story reported:
“A former Israeli ambassador to the United States said Thursday that Israel's influence on U.S. policymaking has "diminished greatly" and that the relationship between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Donald Trump has grown less intimate.
Michael Herzog, Israel's ambassador to the U.S. for most of the Biden administration, told an Israeli radio station that his opinion is based on the optics of Netanyahu's roughly 90-minute meeting with Trump on Tuesday at the White House.
The meeting was held behind closed doors. There was no news conference afterward. Netanyahu reportedly entered the White House through a side entrance that was only partially visible to reporters. He left without fanfare.”
Then there was this from Fox:
Fox News Crew Notes Trump Was ‘Irked’ by Netanyahu Ahead of Oval Office Sit-Down
The story reported this on Trump’s tone of voice from the Fox reporter:
(Lucas) Tomlinson noted afterwards Trump "sounded a little irked there with the Israeli prime minister talking about this intelligence, talking to the press, and not dealing with him directly."
Meanwhile The Times of Israel headlined:
Why Netanyahu got the side-door treatment at the White House
Then there was also this from The Times on the optics:
Wary of perception that Israel driving war, Trump and Netanyahu opt to avoid optics altogether
President keeps press out of meeting amid concern that a widely covered sit-down, as he mulls renewing Iran offensive, would bolster belief that PM wields outsized influence over US
On and on go similar headlines and “news” stories. The purpose is always the same: To use media scrutiny of body language to interpret the substance of serious policy meetings between the American President and the Israeli Prime Minister.
Can body language sometimes be a tell on substance? For sure.
As a young Reagan White House aide, I recall exactly how the body language of the famous Reagan-Gorbachev Reykjavik, Iceland summit was a distinct tell that the suddenly-called summit between the American President and Soviet leader had not gone well.
The summit was held in a one-room school house. There was no press inside, only outside the building. It did not go well. And when Gorbachev pressed to get an agreement favorable to the Soviets, demanding Reagan give up his strategic defense initiative -- dubbed “Star Wars” by liberal opponents -- Reagan, per our staffer colleagues who were there in the room, told the rest of us Reagan staffers back in Washington that the President slapped the table and snapped to his Secretary of State George Shultz: “Let’s go, George.”
With that, Reagan got up and led an American walkout. Gorbachev raced after him, the cameras running as the two emerged at the door to the building and began descending the steps. Reagan was plainly angry, the anger visible with the scowl on his face. Gorbachev said he didn’t know what else he could have done. To which Reagan replied brusquely: “You could have said yes.” With that the President brusquely shook hands, got in the open door of his limousine, slammed it shut and the Secret Service agent at the wheel gunned the engine and the President was off to the airport and his waiting Air Force One.
All of which is to say, Reagan knew the media was swarming outside the schoolhouse. And, actor that he was, he knew exactly how to visibly demonstrate his decidedly genuine anger.
In fact, this episode was the exception that proved the rule. Most of the time Reagan had a smile on his face during encounters with foreign leaders.
But that never stopped the media from trying to read Reagan’s body language or that of a visiting congressional or foreign leader to interpret what had happened in the closed door meeting with the President and whomever.
Which goes to say, it is all too easy for the media to try and read presidential body language and then tell the American people that A, B or C had happened. And in doing so, getting the substance of what happened behind closed doors wrong.
Not to mention that in Trump’s case -- and Reagan’s before that -- there are members of the media who want to always sound "in the know" all too willing to say X happened behind closed doors based on what they interpret -- wrongly -- as signaled by presidential body language.
In short, media scrutiny of Trump can easily be erroneously based on style versus substance. Which is another way of saying that for the sake of accuracy and the historical record it would be wiser for the media to wait until they hear whatever news they are expecting straight from the President himself or, at the very least, from a participant inside the room of whatever meeting is being held.
Not too much to ask, is it? Alas, in the day and age of 21st century media and its incessant drive to know whatever happened behind the scenes of this or that presidential meeting and know it now! -- right now! -- the answer sadly is yes.
So the world spins on.
In the very long ago (1960s) there was a popular TV show Dragnet, featuring a fictional ace detective named Joe Friday, played legendarily by actor Jack Webb. And as “Detective Friday” set about interrogating somebody about the crime he was investigating Friday would famously say that what he wanted from the witness was: “The facts, ma’am. Just the facts.”
But as today’s media follows President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu everywhere, those words and the sentiment behind them still ring true. What the American people deserve from the media covering President Trump are the facts -- just the facts.
Which, it would seem, is not too much to ask. But they can't wait to sound like they know everything immediately.
