Archive for the ‘media coverage’ tag
Former vice presidential running mate Sarah Palin is saying that her biggest regret is that she did not speak enough to media outlets during her and John McCain’s bid for the White House. She said the interviews she did were not the ones she would have chosen and that the campaign decisions were largely made by folks she did not know.
We, of course, remember the disastrous interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric. Apologists said the liberal media was out to get her, to set her up or frame her with questions that were too tough or too probe. That’s nonsense. For an honest, up front politician with an intellect to back up the rhetoric, like Bill Clinton, no question is too tough or probing. From the Couric interview:
Couric: Do you think the coverage of you been sexist?
Palin: No. I don’t. It’s obvious there are some double standards here. You know, in terms of what the media has been doing. But I think that’s more attributable to the Washington media elite not knowing who I am and just asking a whole lot of questions. Not so much based on gender, though. But based on just the fact that I’m not part of the Washington herd.
Couric: Having said that, do you think it would be sexist not to question your credentials and your policy positions.
Palin: It would be sexist if the media were to hold back and not ask me about my experience, my vision, my principles, my values. You’re right.
Couric: If that’s the case, why haven’t you been more accessible to reporters?
Palin: I am so happy to talk to reporters. My life is an open book, happy to do it and very happy for more opportunities to do so.
Notice: Couric directly asked Palin why she hasn’t been more accessible. Palin said she was “so happy to talk to reporters.” Her campaign, on the other hand. … I personally and honestly think Palin was (and still is) more than happy to talk to reporters without restrictions (Even if not possessing the capacities to eloquently and convincingly answer their questions), but the McCain camp held her back, thinking she was a loose pistol and even reaping some of the results of her loose-cannon-ness, despite their efforts.
The so-called “liberal media” was not out to get Palin, but perhaps out to get the foolishness of the McCain campaign, who clearly only appointed Palin as the vice presidential nominee for political reasons. Giuliani, Romney or heck, even Lindsey Graham or Fred Thompson would have technically been better choices, but the campaign went with a woman who, perhaps, could bring vigor to the ticket and could mobilize scores of women, evangelicals, etc. for the Republican cause. Now, Palin is still in the headlines, and we fail to see why, and the chances are, she will be in the headlines for years to come, and, we add, in the running for the 2012 vice presidential or presidential seat. Frightening.