During my five years as Hungarian Ambassador in Washington, DC, we used public communications extensively—both traditional tools and “outside the box” ones. Every day my staff and I were on the lookout for new outlets to portray our country in a positive light.
In that vein, my two appearances on the Colbert Report were, without doubt, the greatest achievements of them all. In terms of public policy these brief episodes overshadowed everything I had done in my capacity as the representative of a country that rightly has a saying: “If the World is God’s hat, Hungary is the flower bouquet on it.”
The first invitation to the show was prompted by Stephen Colbert entering a Bridge naming contest in Hungary, which was launched by the Ministry of Transportation. (Check it out on “Colbert Nation: The Bridge.”) Until Colber entered the competition, the leading contestants were Chuck Norris and Miklos Zrinyi, a 17th-century Hungarian national hero. Born of his desperate desire to win the competition, Stephen Colbert called our revered hero an a–hole!
Budapest was offended, up in arms, and demanded from me a quick and clear response to this unacceptable American behavior. The second time around, Colbert was even tougher, calling the Hungarians “paprika snorting Goulies”, in an allusion to the pride of Hungarian Cuisine. (See it on “Colbert Nation: The Apology.”)
In both episodes, I could have chosen to be offended, much as a big part of the official Kazakh establishment was offended by Sacha Baron Cohen’s imaginary character Borat. Instead, I decided to face the deadly Colbert directly. When he first invited me to his show, I presented him with the news that he was the winner of the naming contest but laid out a series of conditions that were not only impossible to satisfy, but also made up. The second time around, now that I knew that his weakness was his larger than life ego (that is, his on-screen persona; the real Stephen Colbert is generous and nice), I simply brought him a gift: a beautiful electric guitar made by a Hungarian luthier. I came away with one of the biggest pro-Hungarian public diplomacy coups ever: Stephen told the guest who appeared on the show after me that I was “small, but dignified.” But seriously, this was Hungary, and the Hungarians, receiving the appreciation of Stephen Colbert in front of millions of Americans.
To go on the show required some self-confidence, humility and courage. It was no trick, no gimmick. It was a result of a long and meticulous study of the American media, and, last but not least, a thorough understanding of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Because of the unique American attitude toward free speech and open debate, Washington is the most difficult terrain for any foreigner trying to influence U.S. political thinking and perceptions. It is, in particular, a nightmare for public affairs offices in some countries and especially for propaganda ministries in others. The first are bound to score successes; the latter are bound to fail. Breaking through the haze of world and local news, politics, and celebrity-driven agenda is difficult but not impossible. Content matters, one must be able to distinguish between different kinds of communications—the serious and the lowly, the scholarly and the official, the formal and the informal. Presentation matters too. The most important thing is that you want to be good news. And the messages must be to the point, well founded, innovative, elevated and respectful. They must be measured, and, as I have heard many times as a response to my own efforts, you must know when enough is too much. Respect the three basic rules: moderation, moderation, moderation.
There are some other rules. Hold your head up high, but be modest. Always look for the root cause of criticism and make every effort to find common ground. Find out why that piece that upsets you was written; after all, maybe you are in the wrong. At times, rather than fighting back with thinly veiled defensive language, one must simply let go. Don’t keep bad news on the front burner. A humorous comment, however harsh, doesn’t merit government response. And a comment by a scholar should not be confused with an official note. On the contrary, a scholarly view should trigger, perhaps even more than official statements, soul searching and reconsideration, because scholars by nature are looking for root causes, not short-term political debating points.
I play in a rock band called The Coalition of the Willing. There is much for politics to learn from a rock band, such as: louder is not better. Our lead guitarist and musical director, an official Guitar God, Jeff “Skunk” Baxter, has a rule: Always leave the stage with people wanting more.
These are some of the thoughts that came to mind as I read the Hungarian government’s response to a recent article by Francis Fukuyama in The American Interest Online.