Answer this, Hillary Clinton
Npresidential candidates are under any legal obligation to hold regular news conferences. But periodically submitting to questions from a diverse group of reporters is a way to demonstrate accountability to the public and an incentive to stay abreast of the issues.
Hillary Clinton surely knows that, yet it has been almost nine months since she has held a news conference. It took place on Dec. 5, before the first primary was held, when she was still battling Sen. Bernie Sanders — and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (remember him?) — for the Democratic presidential nomination she formally secured in June. A lot has happened since then.
To be fair, Clinton often has answered questions from journalists in other settings during that period, including a telephone interview with the Los Angeles Times editorial board in May. If you squinted, you could even call one of those events a news conference. On Aug. 5, Clinton spoke to a joint convention of the National Assn. of Black Journalists and the National Assn. of Hispanic Journalists in Washington, D.C., and took some questions from audience members. She also has participated in brief exchanges with the reporters shadowing her campaign.
Clinton acts as if it doesn’t matter that she avoids the hurly-burly of news conferences so long as she talks to journalists in other situations. When CNN’s Anderson Cooper recently asked her during an interview whether she would hold a news conference, her response was: “Well, Anderson, I'm talking to you right now.”
And she was — including about charges that donors to the Clinton Foundation had improper influence on the State Department during her tenure as secretary of State. But a one-on-one television conversation is no substitute for a freewheeling news conference with multiple questioners.
Will that sort of event touch on topics Clinton might prefer to avoid? Will it force her to think on her feet? Will it include unwelcome, challenging and sometimes even hostile questions? Of course, but given widespread doubts about her trustworthiness and transparency, Clinton needs to confront such questions in a relatively unpredictable environment. Her continued refusal to enter that arena makes her look fearful and defensive.
Donald Trump has committed his own sins against transparency, including revoking the credentials of reporters from media organizations whose coverage has displeased him. But the Republican nominee has held news conferences, some more protracted than others. (That doesn’t mean the answers have been illuminating; just the opposite.)
If Clinton is elected president, presumably she will follow the example of her predecessors and hold wide-ranging news conferences at which some of the questions will play to her strengths and others will exasperate her. Why not start now?