(instrumental tune) - [Commentator] This is a production of PBS Charlotte.

- This week on "Un-spun", the politics of interviews.

It's free publicity, but not always good publicity.

Behind the scenes, how do candidates choose who to talk to?

How do they answer the hard questions they're trying to hide from?

And how to turn a bad interview into a good soundbite.

Plus the top five types of interviews that politicians should be wary of.

(instrumental tune) In today's America, welcome to the spin game.

Believe me, I know.

I'm Pat McCrory.

When I was governor and mayor, I played the spin game.

I was played by the spin game.

But aren't we all done being spun?

Let's take the spin out of the world we're in here on "Un-spun".

(instrumental tune) Good evening, I'm Pat McCrory, and welcome to "Un-spun", the show that tells you what politicians are thinking, but not saying.

Together, Trump and Harris will wind up spending more than a billion dollars in this campaign on paid political advertising, so you would think free face time on network TV would be good for a town hall or a sit down interview, would be a huge win for either candidate.

But be careful what you ask for.

(audience cheering) - Was democracy best served by President Biden stepping down and basically handing you a nomination?

You didn't have to go through a primary process.

You didn't have to fight off other contenders.

That's not really the way our system was intended to work.

- It is my responsibility to earn the vote, and I'm gonna work to do that.

- But I think this truncated process is why people think or say they don't really know who you are.

- Look, I've been in this... - That was Harris getting politely grilled by CBS on "60 Minutes".

She was also not so politely grilled on Fox with an audience of nearly 8 million tuning into both interviews.

Trump meanwhile said no to "60 Minutes", but faced his own tough questions during a town hall on Univision that was widely watched by Latino viewers.

- You waited so long to take action while your supporters were attacking the capitol.

And also people in your administration who don't support you.

I'm curious how people so close to you and your administration no longer wanna support you.

So why would I wanna support you?

- We're gonna, we're right now in another election.

We want, all I want is honest elections.

I'm willing to take any chance.

I want honest elections.

We have tremendous loyalty to the Trump administration.

Biden, when he lost... - They say that all publicity is good publicity, but that's not always true in a political campaign.

So a candidates first choice for so-called free media is often a friendly face with a huge following.

That's why Harris sat down with Oprah for 90 minutes and why Trump spent 2 hours on Twitter talking with Elon Musk.

But this late in a race this close, maybe there's no more playing it safe.

Not if you're swaying those last few votes that could be the difference between winning and losing.

Because at the end of October, politics is like baseball.

It's time for the World Series.

The softball interviews are pretty much over.

Now it's all fastballs and curve balls coming at both candidates, with voters watching to see if either one strikes out or hits a home run.

Joining us now to talk more about how interviews in the media can influence an election is Steven V. Roberts.

He's a veteran journalist, a bestselling author, and a national political commentator who has spent more than 50 years covering 13 presidential campaigns with the New York Times, US News, and World Report, and ABC News.

Together with his late wife, ABC News commentator, Koki Roberts, Steven also co-wrote a popular newspaper column syndicated across the US.

Steven, thanks for joining us on "Un-spun".

- Sure.

It's a pleasure, Pat.

- And first, I want to first congratulate you on your family regarding your son becoming the new chancellor at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.

Congratulations to him and to your whole family.

- Well, thank you, Pat.

Of course, you gave my son Lee, his first job in public life as the budget director of the state when you were governor.

And so our family is very grateful to you for recognizing the talent of that young man.

- Well, he is a very talented guy.

Listen, I wanna talk to you about political interviews since it's in the news all over the place in your long history, along with your wonderful wife, Koki, who we dearly miss.

You both were experts in political interviews.

What, has the method of political interviews changed in the last decade or two?

- Well, in some ways yes, and in some ways, no.

Look, interviews are always interviews.

In the sense that you try to get someone to answer candidly, you try to break new ground, you try to somehow disrupt their talking points.

And you've been on the other side of many of those in interviews, Governor.

You know that your people prep you to say certain things and a good interview tries to get you to be spontaneous, tries to get you to be candid.

And that's always been true.

What has changed are the platforms.

What's changed is that you don't just have public television, you don't just have the network.

You have a whole new system of podcasts and websites and far more people have voices and have access to the media ecosystem, which is very helpful.

You don't have to be on PBS to be a player in the media marketplace and to, you know, to get even the presidential candidates to sit down with you.

And in many ways, I think that's very helpful and really better for the voters because they have far more platforms to choose from, far greater diversity of interviewers to ask those questions.

- So behind the scenes, and I've done Meet the Press and I've done ABC and PBS.

Behind the scenes before a big interview with a presidential candidates, who's involved in determining what questions will be asked?

- Well, it's a cooperation.

And look, I spent a lot of years, for instance, subbing on the host of the "Diane Rehm Show" on public radio.

And I'm been on that side of those conversations many, many times.

It's a combination, as you know, of good producers and researchers who including, you know, some of my former students who now work for CNN and now work for CBS and prep these anchors.

But any good questioner only begins with the list of questions.

A good interviewer also has to be a good listener.

You have to pick up on nuances, you have to pick up on tangents.

You have to be able to say, "What did you just say?

Tell me more."

And so some interviewers can get too locked into their list of questions.

It's gotta be more of a conversation in some ways than an interview to be really good.

And the best interviewers are not just good askers of questioners, they're very good listeners and pick up on something new, something interesting, something that they hadn't heard before.

And you gotta be able to think on your feet and follow up quickly.

- So if you were, had a chance to interview both former President Trump and Vice President Harris, what's the intro question?

Or what's one of the big questions that you would ask where you try to get an answer?

- Well, for Vice President Harris, you know, when she was on "The View" just two weeks ago, you know, she was asked a very good question, which was, how would you be different from a Biden presidency?

And her answer, which was, well, I can't think of anything right away, was immediately picked up by the Trump campaign as a sign that she really is not a change agent.

And I would, if I was talking to Harris, I would press her much more on, how are you different?

Now, obviously, just simply optically, she's different as a woman, as a woman of color.

But you know, her biggest problem as a candidate is convincing people that she would be a change.

You can say, "I'm turning the page," but that doesn't answer the question turning, what's the next page?

We know what you're turning away from.

Well, what are you turning to?

And I think that that still is an area that she has not fully explored, not fully been candid with the voters about.

And I would do that.

In terms of Trump, I think you really have to press hard on his lies.

And I use that word advisedly.

I know a lot of journalists are reluctant to use the word lie because they say that this implies that you, that someone is knowingly spreading falsehoods.

But we know that Donald Trump knows that he lost the election, but he continues to say that he won it.

And that's a lie.

And you just have to continue to press him.

I'm not very optimistic that you get very good answers, but you need to continue to press him on his factual inaccuracies over and over and over again just to document that for the American people.

They can decide for themselves.

Every voter in North Carolina, everywhere else can decide for herself and himself.

Whether Trump's answers are important or damaging or not, but you gotta get those answers out there.

- Two interesting controversies.

One is fact checks, which I notice at the end of say, this week, and the end of "Meet the Press", at the end of a question, at the end of the answer, the commentator often goes, "Well, this is the truth."

What do you think about fact checks during interviews and debates?

- I'm very much in favor of fact checking.

I think that, for instance, when the ABC moderators during the debate fact checked Donald Trump in real time, I thought that was very helpful to the voters.

I thought CNN's decision not to fact check was a mistake.

And I say that with Dana Bash, one of the moderators being one of my favorite former students.

But I think they made a mistake in not following up.

Donald Trump has changed the entire structure, the entire set of assumptions that journalists have to make.

If Donald Trump says, you know, "I won the election."

That's a fact, Pat.

It's also a lie.

And you know, I worked for the New York Times for 25 years, including 2 years as the White House Scholar respondent when Ronald Reagan was president.

I never once wrote a sentence that said, "President Reagan said falsely yesterday," or "President Reagan misrepresenting the truth yesterday."

You see that every single day now because Donald Trump is totally immune from fact checking.

He's totally immune from committing, from admitting error.

He's totally immune from apologizing.

And you can't serve your listeners and your readers fairly if you simply quote his lies.

- So Steven, what do you think about the controversy of editing, edits of a longer interview?

Should the audience know what edits were done?

Should the whole transcripts come out?

There's this controversy with "60 Minutes" right now, for example.

- Yeah, well, look.

"60 Minutes" has been there for 50 years and every single interview they've ever done has been edited.

So if Donald Trump is complaining that they edit him, then he hasn't been watching "60 Minutes" for the last 50 years.

I do think that it's certainly fair for news organizations to edit interviews.

This interview is live to take, but it's only nine minutes.

You can interview someone for 20 minutes and do 5 minutes on the air.

That's a totally legitimate journalistic exercise, if you do it fairly, if you do it in a way that conveys the true and authentic views of the people you're interviewing.

If you in any way distort or misrepresent how the true meaning of an interview, that's a profound violation of journalistic ethics.

One of the courses I teach here at George Washington University, I'm gonna be teaching this afternoon, is in journalistic ethics.

And I can tell you anybody who edits something in a way that distorts the meaning is a profound violation.

I do think in these days where people have access through digital platforms to the full transcript, I think it's absolutely important.

Even if "60 Minutes" or any other news broadcast edits an interview, put out the full transcript and make sure that if you've made a mistake, if you've been distorting, if you've have somehow been unfair to the person you've edited, you should be called on it.

You should be fact checked.

You should be held accountable.

So I'm all for putting out those full transcripts because in the same way that we hold the people we interviewed to account, we should be held to full account as journalists for our honesty and integrity too.

- Steven, it's an honor to have you and thank you for your honest assessment of the media.

- My pleasure, Pat.

- Next up, PBS Charlotte's Jeff Sonier, takes "Un-spun" on the street to an early voting location, finding out what impact those media interviews really have on voters.

- Yeah, these just aren't registered voters or likely voters, these are actual voters casting their ballots early.

So we're asking them, do media interviews really make a difference when it comes to who you're voting for?

(instrumental tune) - I like those interviews.

I mean, I've seen pieces of the Brett Baier, you know, interview with Harris.

I thought that was a great interview.

- [Jeff] Do they make a difference to you when you're standing in line ready to vote?

- No, I try not.

I take everything with a grain of salt, personally.

I know there's a lot of editing and everyone wants to look the best.

So I try not to think too deeply into it.

- I think some of them are very unfair, very.

They'll ask a question and then they'll interrupt the answer.

I think it's the talking heads that irritate me.

- Yeah, there's like softball interviews and then there's hardball interviews.

And I much prefer the hardball interviews.

- [Jeff] You wanna hear the real answers to the real questions.

- I want tough questions.

And when they don't give an answer, I want it to be pushed because, you know, a lot of times you do not get an answer from 'em.

You know, they skirt around as much as they possibly can and most of the time you really don't get an answer.

- Beating around the bush on a lot issues.

But it seems this year they're coming out more directly.

- I'm gonna say it depends.

I think there have been some fair interviews.

I think there have been some tough questions asked, but I think there have also been some softball questions.

- And would you rather have the tough questions?

- Absolutely.

I mean, if they're gonna be president or any elected office, they should be able to answer the tough questions.

- And while those are the opinions regarding the interviews they've already seen, well what about the interviews still to come in this campaign?

Well, for these voters, it won't make a difference.

They're already in line.

They've already made up their minds.

Pat.

- Thanks Jeff.

So what do you think about the issue?

Email us your comments on the politics of interviews to unspun@wtvi.org.

Or even better, send us a video and we might use it on the air.

(instrumental tune) Okay, tonight on our "Un-spun" countdown, we've got the top five types of interviews politicians should be wary of.

Believe me, I know this.

I've done many interviews and these are my top five.

Number five, oh, the tricky speed question round.

This is when the interviewer goes, listen, we've only got one minute to go, so I'm gonna ask you five quick questions.

Be wary of them.

Now, if they're about what's your favorite band?

The Beatles or The Stones?

That's fine.

But if it's a question like, what's your solution to World peace?

Ignore it.

These are very dangerous speed rounds to get you in a trap and you don't want that.

Number four, yes or no questions.

Oh, yes or no.

Do you agree on this candidate or on this bill?

Yes or no?

And the dilemma is it could be a very complex bill, which takes more than a yes or no.

Or it could be a loaded question where the question is so set up that you lose with either a yes or a no.

Avoid that answer, yes or no, as much as possible, no matter how much the moderator ask it.

Number three, the old argumentative question.

This is often the question which is almost a punch in the gut.

A punch in the gut where they're accusing you of something that's untrue.

And what you end up doing is challenging the question more than answering the question.

And no one wins with that type of question or answer by the candidate.

Number two, the prepackaged surprise video.

Oh, this has happened to be on "Meet the Press" and "Sunday Fox".

You name it.

And they don't tell you until you get there.

In fact, they don't even tell you when you get there.

They all of a sudden, Governor, before we get to this question, we wanna show you a video.

And often it's a loaded video accusing you of three or four things which you don't have time to respond to.

And it shows your surprise in the face.

You're actually put in a losing position as a candidate.

But it makes for very good TV.

And number one, the controversy going on right now with "60 Minutes".

The edited interview.

As we said in the question and answer with Mr. Roberts, we all know that "60 Minutes" edits the interview.

The question will be, is it a fair edit?

They haven't edited me correctly in the past, and I don't think they edited correctly in the last interview with Vice President Harris.

But the fact is, both candidates know when you go on "60 Minutes", it's their prerogative on how they're gonna edit not only the show itself, but the promos of the show.

(instrumental tune) PBS Charlotte, Jeff Sonier, an old media reporter out to get me, joins me now for "Un-spun" one-on-one.

- One-on-one.

All argumentative questions today, okay?

- What difference does it make?

- Just here to give you a hard time.

- I'm gonna re pivot anytime anyway.

- Okay.

First question.

Why would the Harris campaign agree to a non-friendly interview on a network like Fox?

- I think it's a smart move.

Sometimes when you go to a non-friendly network, you're more aggressive and you'll fight back and your supporters like you fighting back against the network that's against you.

I think it shows strength.

- And on the other side, why would the Trump campaign turn down a "60 Minutes" interview that's got potentially 8 million viewers watching?

- It's personal with Trump.

Leslie Stahl interviewed him, he thought it was miss-edited, he thought it was not courteous.

And I can see LaCivita's, Chris LaCivita, his campaign manager, stay away from "60 Minutes".

We can't trust their editing.

I also thought that was a good move.

- Okay, speaking of Leslie Stahl, speaking of "60 Minutes", 10 years ago when you were governor, you appeared on "60 Minutes" talking about the Asheville and the Dan River.

I've got a clip of that interview.

Let's watch it and I've got some questions about it.

- All right.

When I heard about the Dan River plant having a coal ash spill, my first reaction was, wait a minute, that plant's been closed for years.

Why are we having a spill at a plant that's not even open?

- Tell everybody how much the fine was.

- I don't have that list, but again- - It was $99,111.

- That's correct.

- [Leslie] Which does not sound like a big fine.

- It wasn't a big fine.

- Okay, now that was the last thing we heard from you on that story.

I watched the whole story.

- Right.

- Tell me about what else was and wasn't said.

What else was and wasn't seen in that interview.

- Well, she cut off the edit.

- Hmm.

- The edit occurred.

I said it wasn't a big fine, which is what they wanted to hear, but I was about to say, but there's another lawsuit coming.

And they cut that completely outta the story, which I thought was very unfair editing.

In fact, you even saw my mouth moving when they cut it, which shows they cut me in the middle of a sentence.

But they had an agenda and their agenda was to answer the question the way the theme of the story was gonna be and the theme of the story was to catch me not doing enough for my old company, Duke Power Company, which was totally untrue.

- So it's not just candidate interviews, it's all interviews.

In some cases when you're in an edited interview situation, you can expect some of what you're saying not to be part of that finished call.

- Well, in fact, Leslie Stahl probably interviewed me for well over an hour.

- Hmm.

- And I think I had 80 seconds in that story, and but that was the worst edit I've ever seen for myself because that's how basically the story ended.

- Steven Roberts talked about the online interviews, the podcast, the things that are starting to surface in campaigns.

Is that why candidates are going to people like Joe Rogan for a live interview versus "60 Minutes" for a taped interview?

- Absolutely.

Absolutely.

And that's why I've done like "The Chuck Todd Podcast".

I did it after being on "Meet the Press".

He'd go, "Will you do my podcast?"

And I loved it because there was enough time to answer the question.

There was enough time to have dialogue like we're having.

And there also wasn't any editing of that podcast.

Unlike, you see, even on the Sunday talk shows can be edited and the audience doesn't know that some of the interviews are done, they're taped live, but they're done earlier.

Where if they go over a schedule, they'll cut out some of the interview and the audience doesn't know that.

In fact, "Meet the Press" got some controversy about that a couple of weeks ago.

- Last quick question.

Friendly interviews don't always wind up looking so friendly after the edits or after they're used in an opponent's commercial.

Talk about that.

- Well, with the internet now, there is no friendly interview 'cause they can splice any of your comments and make it into something much bigger.

And in fact, in my Republican primary, when I was on WBT Radio in the morning, I used to do a joke thing, a top five.

I did a number one saying Trump should get off the stage.

And I meant it actually as a piece of advice.

Get off the stage and let Biden come on the stage.

You might have a better chance of winning.

Well the commercial of that clip was, "Pat McCrory says, "Trump get off the stage."

And that being done during the Republican primary works against you.

And it was very successful for my candidate, now Senator Ted Budd.

So they can splice anything.

And they also do it with pictures, by the way.

The loaded videos or the missed clips of loaded videos that they'll show you like you just did.

It can be very, very tough, especially if you don't know in what context the questions were.

But believe me, I remember that "60 Minutes" interview.

- We're gonna wrap it up so we don't have to add anything in this particular interview.

Thank you, Governor.

- Thank you.

(instrumental tune) Okay.

It's less than two weeks before the election.

And why are the networks and newspapers still asking mostly easy questions for the candidates they endorse and hostile questions for the candidates they don't?

And zero questions that most voters really care about.

How about questions about their detailed plans to fix inflation or immigration or social security?

What about the deficit or the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine?

Listen, I know this game, I've played this game.

For the media, these interviews aren't about the issues.

They're all about those gotcha questions and moments.

That's how they get the ratings and readership and the clicks and the views on their news websites and social media.

And for the candidates, well, who cares what the questions are?

Behind the scenes their advisors say, just ignore them and re-pivot to the same old campaign talking points.

Then re-edit them into campaign commercials.

Just like the debates.

Yeah.

After the interview, that's when the real propaganda starts.

And that goes for the media too.

An hour long interview cut down to 20 minutes, that's what the audience actually sees.

And then down to 20 seconds for the sound bites and the ads and the promos that everybody sees.

It hasn't always been this way.

When I first ran for the Charlotte City Council way back in 1989, it was like cramming for an exam in college.

I had to be ready for any question on any issue from any reporter.

And nobody in the news was counting clicks, or views, no fluff.

They were listening to see if I really knew my stuff about crime and land use planning and zoning and taxes and transportation.

Honestly, answering questions as a city council candidate, that was actually harder than when I ran for the US Senate.

Today, candidates sit down for big interviews to help their campaigns raise big money, which they spend on ads at the same media outlets that are doing the interviews.

It sounds like a win-win, right?

Except for the voters, still waiting for the answers to the questions that nobody is asking.

That's the reality as I see it.

I hope you'll come back next week for our presidential preview.

We'll talk with political pros in both parties about the race that everybody's watching.

How could it affect what happens in dozens of other elections across the Carolinas?

And why many voters are just glad the campaign is finally winding down.

(instrumental tune) That's our next "Un-spun", where we'll tell you what politicians are thinking, but not saying.

Goodnight folks.

(instrumental music continues) - [Commentator] A production of PBS Charlotte.