Turns out the best way to conduct a congressional hearing is to treat it like a story on “60 Minutes.”
The House Jan. 6 Select Committee is in the middle of rewriting an old political script, dispensing with some well-worn rituals that seem frozen in time. Those have been replaced in these hearings with something that looks more like a fast-moving segment of investigative television — strong emotions, urgent soundbites, and a clear portrayal of good guys vs. bad guys.
The typical congressional hearing procedure is exceedingly familiar. Blinding klieg lights burst on as the witness sits at a table along with his lawyers. High above and in front, a group of representatives is perched, ready to deliver judgment. Each in turn gives lengthy speeches disguised as questions, to which the witness responds with an over-rehearsed answer. All of this is expressed in a humdrum manner that seems determined to undermine the sense that anything critical and indispensable is happening.
It wasn’t always that way. Live televised hearings once had greater electricity. The cameras, the lights, the buzz from the gallery — all of it contributed to a dynamic and tense atmosphere where viewers expected the unexpected.
One of the most famous examples came in 1951, when the Kefauver Committee investigated organized crime. More than 600 witnesses testified, including dozens of gangsters from around the country. Mob boss Frank Costello demanded cameras not shoot his face; they focused instead on his hands — nervously twisting, turning and sweating under the hot lights and tough questions. It was compelling television.
Eventually that changed. Every player came to understand their role in an increasingly formulaic drama, giving the cameras just what they required — no more, no less. Hearings often came across as ceremony for an inner circle, with viewers and voters left to play minor characters.
Ironically, by deemphasizing live testimony and using the high-end production skills of network television, the Jan. 6 Committee has brought back to congressional hearings that long-gone crackle of anticipation.
Don Hewitt, the creator of “60 Minutes,” often said his program’s mantra was simple: Tell me a story. That’s what the committee is doing, with the help of former ABC News president James Goldston.
They’ve made strong use of the TV-friendly tools at hand, including deep reliance on video-taped depositions. Excerpts from these depositions allows the committee to cut quickly to the heart of an issue, unlike live testimony.
The mannered and imposing live environment can also make it difficult for witnesses to appear unaffected and straightforward — it’s not an atmosphere designed for candid discussion. Video depositions, so far, have had a different feeling: Most witnesses seem less guarded, more authentic, even with lawyers close at hand. Sitting in a conference room or looking into a computer screen for a video call is less intimidating, more intimate and conversational.
The most prominent example: former Attorney General Bill Barr. Full of character in any setting, Barr has been particularly revealing in video depositions. He uses big gestures and spicy language. His answers are simple and direct. He doesn’t seem to be dancing around the questions or playing to cameras.
The format also gives the committee freedom to weave in clips of news footage and well-produced graphics. They underline the depositions and live testimony, emphasizing key findings for viewers.
Rather than five-minute rounds of questions from every committee member — often a free-pass to digress and grandstand for the cameras — each hearing installment features just one or two representatives. The questions are short and concise. The committee often stops at several points to summarize what’s been revealed so far, and where that fits in the larger story.
The result has been hit television — an investigative series in which each episode reveals a crucial development that moves the story along, bolstered by new sets of villains and heroes, leading — presumably — to a grand finale with a blockbuster ending.
Clearly, not every congressional hearing needs the “60 Minutes” approach. Some may be better served by more classic rituals. These hearings themselves have had compelling live witnesses, including Capitol police officer Caroline Edwards and Vice President Mike Pence’s former counsel, Greg Jacob.
But the Jan. 6 Committee has also shown the value of a new method, useful when attention must be paid to a complicated, multi-layered and controversial event with dozens of witnesses contributing different perspectives.
In a case like this, it’s best to follow Don Hewitt’s advice: Tell a clear, clean story. So far, it’s working. Even without that famous tick-tick-tick in the opening credits.
Joe Ferullo is an award-winning media executive, producer and journalist and former executive vice president of programming for CBS Television Distribution. He was a news executive for NBC, a writer-producer for “Dateline NBC” and worked for ABC News. Follow him on Twitter @ironworker1.