Welcome to “Washington’s Wildest Week,” as the website for Nerd Prom, a documentary about the annual White House Correspondents Dinner, describes it. Saturday night the president will join media and celebrities (and media celebrities) for the roast. Patrick Gavin, a former reporter for Politico, calls it “the event of the year.” That it is such a hotly anticipated spectacle might be cause to confirm much of the cynicism about the nation’s capital. In Nerd Prom, Gavin asks the kinds of questions he didn’t when doing much more superficial color coverage of the event. Gavin talks about what he did, why he did it, and what he found. — KJL
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Why would you quit your job to write a documentary about the White House Correspondents Dinner?
Patrick Gavin: Part of it was I was looking to do something different and part of it was that Politico wasn’t really interested in investing in long-form video. I also wanted editorial control. It’s a tough proposal to tell a news organization, “I want to crack the code on this weekend” when they, too, throw their own parties with corporate sponsors, celebrities, etc.
Lopez: Just how excessive does the week of the dinner get? What does this week look like in Washington, D.C.?
Gavin: To be honest, far fewer Washingtonians are bothered by the week than should be. We’ve kind of become conditioned to the circus of it all, which is a tragedy in and of itself. There is this thread of thought that says, “Oh, it’s just a dinner, don’t dwell on it,” which, in my view, is the equivalent of calling the Super Bowl “just a football game.” The dinner has spawned nearly two dozen parties that spread out over a week and can make life in Washington a bit of a traffic-clogged challenge. What you see is event after event, with red carpets, step-and-repeats, fancy bars with signature cocktails, corporate branding, and so on. And very little mention anywhere of White House correspondents.
Lopez: To what extent is Nerd Prom a point for reflection on our celebrity culture?
Gavin: It has to be a point for reflection. The dinner earned its notoriety primarily because celebrities started coming. The dinner grew in popularity because celebrities were there. The dinner got a red carpet because celebrities were there. The dinner lost its focus on White House correspondents because celebrities were there. I could go on. What it shows is the incredible spotlight celebrities bring to anything they touch, but also a tad of a corrupting influence as well. It’s not their fault, but the arrival of celebrities certainly contributed to the dinner becoming the kind of crazy madhouse that it is now.
Lopez: After a number of years of going to the dinner and some of the associated events, I don’t even have the patience to watch it. Why should just this type of person watch the documentary?
Gavin: Washingtonians will like this movie because, well, it centers on them, but it’s really aimed at people outside the Beltway, who don’t know about the week or, if they do, know only that the president cracks some funny jokes. I wanted them to know what it’s become and, more importantly, that it’s become the biggest event in Washington each year. No other event focuses the energies of Washington’s political and media class like this. This is troublesome because, at a time when Washington is the laughingstock of the country, our biggest moment is a giant self-celebration. That should hammer home just how out-of-sync our priorities are.
Lopez: What surprised you the most when you started asking non-celebrity-gossip-type questions in and around the dinner?
Gavin: That the access dried up. When I was at Politico, I had a reputation for asking really softball questions — I was a glorified press release for a lot of folks. As a result, I could get in anywhere. When I announced that I was doing a documentary, however, people got nervous and became much more reluctant to provide access. That’s ironic, of course, because this week is supposed to be about supporting journalists and their quest for access.
Lopez: Are you getting blowback for putting some of what you did on tape? Exposing Hollywood’s lack of interest in the White House correspondents, among other things?
Gavin: I haven’t gotten any blowback about what I taped — at least not to my face. The biggest blowback I’ve gotten has come from the [White House Correspondents’] Association, which throws the dinner. They don’t quite share my viewpoint that the Association’s ratio of CEO salary to scholarship dollars is out of whack. I stand by my reporting (long story short: The Association pays more to its executive director than it doles out for scholarships, a ratio that Charity Navigator confirmed to me was “troubling”), but that’s been the bulk of the pushback.
Lopez: Is there anything about your conversations that confirms some of people’s worst frustrations with Washington? Anything that actually gave you some hope?
Gavin: What confirmed my worst frustrations with Washington is this idea that, “Yeah, it’s kind of embarrassing, but who cares, it’s just a dinner.” That to me is a very scary and cynical attitude. Washington has a 10 percent approval rating — reporters and politicians alike. We are not in a position to disregard how we are viewed by the people who sent us here. If we all admit that our biggest moment each year is kind of gaudy, but then simultaneously don’t give a hoot, it’s hard to see that pervasive attitude doing anything to improve Washington’s standing.
Lopez: There is an aspect to the dinner that is a little bit of an ode to civility, though, isn’t there? If we can laugh with one another, maybe all hope is not lost?
Gavin: True, there’s a case to be made for that, although some people look at that very civility as a dangerous coziness between reporters and politicians, so it just depends on your viewpoint. I don’t really have a beef with the dinner or the parties. I just object to it being our signature event each year. For a town designed to serve others, our top event shouldn’t be one that, instead, celebrates ourselves.
Lopez: Is there any aspect of it where people who don’t usually get together get to do some talking and collaborating perhaps to some good end?
Gavin: For sure, although, again, that can be a double-edged sword. Being cozy with sources and politicians can reap real benefits: It might help you break news. On the other hand, being close with the powerful can also result in news being suppressed.
Lopez: The White House Correspondents’ Association is more than a dinner. Does it serve a real purpose?
Gavin: Although the dinner takes up the bulk of the time of its executive director, they do do other things: Throw panels, develop scholarship programs, fight for access. It’s a good mission. If this week really were about supporting White House correspondents — they’re terribly important and yet face enormous, restrictive challenges from this White House — I’d be very much in favor of this being our signature event. It’s a cause worth supporting.
Lopez: There is a recent document they drafted offering “best practices” for the president in dealing with the press, including proposing that “the President takes questions from the press on a regular basis, no less than once per week, and is available in response to significant news developments” and “the President holds full press conferences at least once a month and takes questions frequently from the pool.” Could the dinner ever become something a little more serious, pressing some of these things?
Gavin: The dinner is certainly a great opportunity to shine a light on this stuff — and they try. The problem is the people in the crowd don’t really care. The crowd kind of snoozes when they present scholarships or make a speech about access. It’s hard because “Fight for the White House correspondent!” isn’t exactly the sexiest charitable cause in the world. Reporters haven’t done a lot to endear themselves to the American public in recent years. But I’d really love it if somehow this cause was championed by more and more people. And this dinner is probably the best opportunity to do that.
Lopez: The dinner isn’t going to get any less excessive anytime soon, is it?
Gavin: Probably not, but I wouldn’t rule it out. The momentum seems to be working against the excess of the week. I’d be willing to bet you money that the Association drops the red carpet soon. There will always be parties, but I think that it won’t be as over-the-top, as people have realized how embarrassing some of it is and how it doesn’t necessarily send the right message to the rest of the country.
Lopez: What might make for better press coverage of the dinner this weekend — and the Monday-morning recaps?
Gavin: I mean, this will probably never happen, but what about a ten-minute Q&A on stage between the president of the White House Correspondents’ Association and the president of the United States during the dinner, about press-access issues? You know, generate some real news. Then you can all go back to it being just fun and silliness, but at least you put some meat back on the bones.
Lopez: Would you like something specific to happen in response to the existence of your documentary?
Gavin: To be honest, it’s kind of a terribly depressing documentary. I point out that this is Washington’s signature event, point out why that’s a bad thing and then ask, “Will that ever change?” And the answer I propose is, “Probably not.” To change things would require a virtual flushing of Washington and a redo, which obviously won’t happen. The only way it’ll really happen is if people in Washington are ashamed of it, and the people best equipped to shame them are the people outside of the Beltway. That’s why I made this movie. To enrage them into action.
Lopez: What’s next for you?
Gavin: I’m really not sure. Not daily political reporting, that much is clear. I just didn’t — and don’t — have the in-your-DNA love for the horserace that everyone else seems to. I’d love to keep making documentaries that pull back the curtain on elements of this town in an entertaining way. HBO, are you listening?