Presidential Debate and the Pivot

If you’ve ever watched the presidential debate, you’ve seen experts in dodging questions in action.   That dodge, also known as a “pivot,” is a way of taking a question on one topic, and shifting the answer to a completely different topic.   Is this anything new?  Nope.  The pivot originated in advertising.

Let me give you an example of a political pivot.  During the 2004 presidential debate between President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, the moderator, Bob Schieffer, asked President Bush:

“Mr. President, what do you say to someone who has lost his job because it was sent overseas?”

“I say, Bob, I’ve got a plan to create 21st century jobs here in America and here’s some help for you to get an education…” and pivot to his signature ‘no child left behind’ legislation.

In 2 sentences, Bush pivoted from unemployment to what he wanted to talk about, education.  See for yourself on YouTube.

Does it happen all the time in politics?  Absolutely.  Research suggests it happens as much as 70% of the time during debates.  We just don’t notice it.

Todd Rogers, a behavioral psychologist at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, has been looking at pivots since that 2004 debate.  To him, the pivot was enraging, and he couldn’t understand why others didn’t feel the same.  What he found was that people are capable of detecting pivots – but only if they’re egregious.   That is, if they pivot between topics that are drastically different.  People don’t seem capable of detecting subtle evasions as we’re focused on is this person honest and/or trustworthy.  We’re actually only casually monitoring the content.  In fact, many in his survey weren’t able to remember the question after a pivot – making them impossible to detect.

Rogers believes that if the question was printed on the screen and remained there through the answer, debate viewers would be able to detect these pivots.  The same could be said for the pivots and framing done in advertising – where the pivot was invented.

Thankfully, the pivot in advertising has more to do with framing the question – which the candidates can only wish they could do.

Let’s say we’re trying to sell chewing gum.  We wouldn’t try to sell it based on features like “long lasting” or “flavor crystals” (though some do).   We would focus on framing the discussion around the benefits – which we pivot around.  So, If you don’t chew our gum, you won’t have fresh breath.  If you don’t have fresh breath, she won’t kiss you.  If she won’t kiss you, you’ll die alone and lonely.”

I’ll admit that’s an exaggerated pivot.  But, once you understand the strategy in advertising and in politics, maybe you’ll notice it during tonight’s presidential debate as the candidates pivot around questions like Russian ballerinas.