Does the televising of Supreme Court hearings impact selection of nominees? It isn't even 9:00 a.m., and I have only heard one radio account (NPR) and read one web account (CNN) of John Roberts. Both accounts focused on how well he will do in the hearings because he is good-looking, charming and quick-witted. One of his "friends" was quoted as saying:
"He is not only absolutely brilliant, but he has good common sense and good sense about people. I do not think the Democrats will be able to touch him," said Patrick J. Schiltz, a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law and a friend of Roberts. "He is incredibly charming, he has movie-star looks. ... He has been an Eagle Scout in his personal life."
(Note to my friends: please do not qualify my brilliance when speaking of me to the press.)
On NPR, Nine Totenberg said that because of his "sunshine personality," he will be "less Robert Bork and more Clark Kent" in the nomination hearings. So, this has me wondering whether someone brilliant but average-looking could make it in this climate. Also, maybe John Roberts would prefer that folks pay attention to his intellect and not his "movie-star looks." Either way, if one has aspirations, a little Botox and a few self-deprecating anecdotes could go a long way.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345157d569e200d834838d4069e2
Links to weblogs that reference Did Video Kill the Supreme Court Star?:
1. Posted by Dave! on July 20, 2005 @ 11:12 | Permalink
Well, to be fair, his friend mentioned his brilliance first, then his common sense and his charm, all before his looks.
And what is wrong with a "sunshine personality"? I was too young to watch the Bork hearings intently (okay, at all) but was the problem his looks or his standoffish attitude? I think that was the point.
I know virtually nothing about Roberts, so I couldn't say one way or the other about how I feel about him as a jurist. But I don't get the feeling he was nominated for his looks; Gonzales isn't a troll, and he didn't make the cut...
2. Posted by Ted on July 21, 2005 @ 4:45 | Permalink
Even in academia, there's a strong correlation between student course evaluation ratings and average perception of a professor's looks. Similar results accrue in the private sector. I suspect, but will never be able to prove, that Bolton (and Bork before him) got an especially hard time because of their relatively unconventional facial hair.
In Roberts' case, the looks and sunny disposition weren't dispositive (he clearly has the skills to back them up), but they almost certainly helped and reinforced him at each stage in his career: impressing professors at Harvard, getting clerkships and well-placed government jobs, building a successful practice, making friends on both sides of the aisle, which in turn got him unanimous confirmation to the D.C. Circuit, all of which in turn made it plausible to nominate him as a confirmable conservative.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
