If it were the 1990s, Joe Biden’s primetime interview Friday with ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos would be a ratings monster. There would be no Netflix, Hulu or PlayStation to compete with it.
What’s more, Biden’s performance would be dispositive, either dooming his candidacy or resuscitating it — that’s how much power the mainstream media once had.
In my estimation, doom is much more likely, regardless of how many credulous Americans tune in to the spectacle. Indeed, this interview strikes me as a no-win proposition for Biden.
This take might sound surprising. After all, Stephanopoulos is a former Democratic aide who is also a member of the dreaded liberal establishment media. Based on that, you might expect him to throw Biden a much-needed lifeline.
Stephanopoulos is the same guy who flummoxed then-presidential candidate Mitt Romney with a question about contraception in 2012, apropos of nothing. He is the same guy who, as recently as 2009, participated in a daily conference call with Democratic operatives (this was more than a decade after he had left the political operative world for journalism).
It is understandable that some Republicans don’t trust him to be objective.
It’s also worth noting that there is lingering bitterness regarding the so-called “revolving door” for prominent Democratic operatives. Stephanopoulos, Chris Matthews, Tim Russert, et al. were elevated to top journalistic positions. The same seldom holds true for Republican operatives. The distinction is that Democrats were allowed to transition into unbiased “hosts,” while conservatives were required to wear partisan identification affixed to their chests.
This brings us to a key question: Respect for the liberal media has collapsed during the Trump era, but is it fair to tar Stephanopoulos’s upcoming interview with Biden?
People who point out Stephanopoulos’s partisan past should also recall that he was accused of being disloyal by President Bill Clinton’s defenders during the run-up to impeachment.
“Stephanopoulos’s barbed commentary about Clinton — openly speculating that allegations of a sexual affair and a criminal coverup might sink his presidency — has outraged many Democrats across the country,” reported the Washington Post’s John F. Harris in 1998.
This is not to say that Stephanopoulos is some paragon of journalistic ethics. But when push came to shove, Stephanopoulos put his job as a pundit ahead of his loyalty to Clinton.
Whether that tells you more about his commitment to journalism or his personal ambition is beside the point. Right now, the sharks are circling Biden’s presidency, just as they were circling Clinton’s. Stephanopoulos (himself a shark) has as much if not more to gain from delivering the coup de grace.
Democrats who are hoping for an easy night for Biden should probably place their hope elsewhere. They are making the same mistake as Democrats who assumed Jake Tapper and Dana Bash — who moderated the CNN presidential debate that first exposed the extent of Biden’s vulnerabilities — might throw the debate in Biden’s favor.
At the very least, Biden’s team might have assumed the debate moderators would have opened the debate with questions about Jan. 6 or Trump's New York hush money conviction, rather than inflation. Biden might have been forgiven for thinking, “Where’s the liberal media when you need them?” The same could be true tonight.
Regardless, it’s hard to see how Biden can benefit from this interview. If Biden performs poorly, it’s game over. And if he performs well, then who cares? He was supposed to do well.
The fact that this interview is even happening tells us a lot about Biden’s problems. A confident candidate with something to prove (and nothing to hide) would not have waited a full week to do this interview. Likewise, a confident candidate would not have picked ABC News and Stephanopoulos to test his mettle — not in 2024, at least.
If Biden is really competent and capable, then he would want to give an interview to someone perceived as non-hostile, but at least unbiased. Instead, Biden chose the sort of format that a president might have chosen in 1998, which at least subtly reinforces the notion that he is out of touch with the times.
What’s more, the president risks getting the worst of both worlds when it comes to his interlocutor. In Stephanopoulos, Biden gets an interviewer who provides the illusion of being biased towards him, while having every incentive to vanquish his political future.
Nobody knows how this interview will go down, and it’s certainly possible that the liberal media will try to salvage this liberal presidency. Sometimes, as they say, the story is “dog bites man,” not “man bites dog.”
But as a professional commentator, Stephanopoulos was willing to destroy the career of the man who made him famous and rich. And if he was willing to do that to Clinton, what might he be willing to do to Biden?
This is a high-stakes interview, regardless of the ratings. It’s hard to imagine a strong showing would revitalize Biden, but a bad showing could be the last straw for many Democrats who are already feeling squeamish about Biden’s chances against Trump.
Will this interview be what sends Biden from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. to Shady Acres? Sometimes playing it safe is the most dangerous thing you can do.
Matt K. Lewis is a columnist, podcaster and author of the books “Too Dumb to Fail” and “Filthy Rich Politicians.”
