Is there any such thing? That’s the focus of the blog I’m posting at Huffington Post. Given the media’s propensity to accept “some people say” support as journalism, it’s difficult, at best, to get at what’s real. The task of political candidates is to somehow get past such loose requirements for sources to get their message out. For Hillary Clinton, the task is huge. The blog explores what authenticity should mean and how candidates, especially Clinton, can begin to break through with an authentic message. The task is tougher for women, though that isn’t intended as an excuse. Warren Buffet thinks Clinton should have been “blunt” earlier about the email fiasco and admires Bernie Sanders for being so.
How does she go from explaining at length issues that most people don’t care to dissect to letting people know who she really is? And is the real Hillary Clinton necessarily one-dimensional? In other words, is authenticity a trap if what it means is communicating the “real you” as if people are that simple?
Most of us have complex characters. Is authenticity being used by people like Andrea Mitchell as a weapon against Clinton, by defining it in a way that makes it impossible to achieve? Worth exploring.