Posted on 09/14/2008 6:42:46 AM PDT by Zakeet
Did ABC use particular camera tricks to make Governor Palin look small and powerless in their Charlie Gibson interview? I've been pointed to a blog that makes a compelling case that they did just that. Using still shots of the Gibson interview with Palin compared to similar Gibson interviews with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, it seems this blogger has proven it to be an open and shut case of manipulation of the viewer. The writer shows how ABC used special camera placements and lenses to make Governor Palin seem small and Charlie Gibson seem overpowering and large by comparison.
By now, just about everyone is aware of Hollywood's special effects and camera techniques. There have been so many TV shows explaining them, so many DVD extras laying out the techniques that most Americans are at least a little familiar with the effects and techniques that filmmakers use to heighten and enhance their work. The anonymous blogger is familiar with these special effects, claims to work in the business in Hollywood himself, and does a great job explaining and pointing out where such effects were used to belittle Governor Palin.
Citing the anti-conservative, Hollywood hatemongering we are all familiar with our blogger remains anonymous. He says he doesn’t want to hurt his career any more than he already has being a conservative in Hollywood. So, with deference to "HollywoodTrench's blog," I'll lay out his argument for you all to decide if he has hit the spot or if he is a bit too conspiratorial for your tastes.
Illustration One - Gibson/Obama
Notice how the camera angles for the Gibson interview with Barack Obama makes them both appear to be equal in size. Notice how their heads are aligned, neither looking smaller or larger than the other. Notice also, our Hollywood blogger says, how the shot was never a "tight" one, that it was a wide frame shot.
Illustration Two - Gibson/Clinton
Just for good measure, our blogger friend throws in a still shot of an interview Gibson did with Senator Hillary Clinton. It shows the same framing technique as the Obama interview.
Illustration Three - Gibson/Palin
Here is what our blogger says of the angles and framing of the Palin interview:
Now take a look at Sarah Palin's interview below. Funny how all the shots are no wider than the one on the left. There's a reason for this. While it's true that Governor Palin is of less stature than Mr. Gibson, the deliberate choice of the camera's height, framing and the use of telephoto lenses all serve to make Mr. Gibson look overpowering and Governor Palin the weak prey. This is common shooting technique we use to make a villain appear more ominous. How intuitive of ABC News to correctly portray themselves.
I have to say, it is an interesting observation that Gibson never looks larger, or seems to be occupying a higher position in the frame when he was interviewing Obama and Clinton. Gibson is always shot as an equal with Clinton and Obama. When compared to how monstrously large he was in juxtaposition with his subject in the Palin interview, well, it certainly makes one pause to think. Was ABC using camera techniques to make Charlie Gibson seem large and commanding and Sarah Palin correspondingly small and weak? Did ABC attempt to put Sarah Palin at a disadvantage to give the viewer the worst possible impression before she was asked even the first question?
I think the blogger makes a good case.
What do you think?
It was a repeat of the Seinfeld episode where his latest girlfriend morphed into Ugly with shadows on her face.
herr goerring vood be prowd!!!
IMHO
Charlie was the one who didn' know the answers to his won questions ( Bush Doctrine or the " Bridge to nowhere)
The legend lives on Sarah
Charlie will see his ratings go south.
It’s called forced perspective, and one little thing out of place can break the illusion. The supremely arrogant leftscum at ABC, though, probably figure most people don’t know this. And sadly, they are probably correct, so their “it’s just an amazing coincidence” lie will work. That is, unless we expose them!
Spot on. The MSM bias cannot be hidden any longer. Now people just need to be educated that it is actually happening.
Of COURSE they did
Since nothing in a high-visibility television interview is left to chance, you can be very sure that decisions about camera angles and such stuff were made by producers before the interview took place. In particular, the decision as to how to frame Gibson and Palin was most definitely not some sort of random decision by a low-level camera operator.
I mentioned this to my wife while watching. They made it look as though Gibson was towering over her. Even the side angles were affected. That, coupled with his schoolmaster pout made him look like a buffoon.
Nah, only the libs watch him now. And in any event, there's not that far South they can go...
Palin is also a foot shorter than Obama. Just saying - they’d have to put her on a stack of phonebooks to get the same shots.
The “footage” I’ve seen , had the speech a little ahead of the video, made for a semi-bizarre situation for an interview. I’m sure many have witnessed this......
I noticed it immediately.
Coincidence you bet.
The answer is obviously yes. One technique used, and Gibson's staff used it, is to put the interviewee in a lower chair. This was done in the Palin interview. I one takes a close look at both of their chairs it's easy to see that the base of Palin’s is lower than Gibson's. Some interviewee's bring a phone book to sit on so to bring themselves up to the same level as the interviewer.
No matter how this campaign comes out, the MSM are the big losers.
The emperor has no clothes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.