Posted on 09/15/2008 12:15:39 PM PDT by Red Steel
MarketWatch Columnist Jon Friedman Warns The Media Live To Build You Up, Then Knock You Down
The Sarah Palin Phenomenon is doomed.
But it's not because of her lack of foreign policy experience or her deer-in-the-headlights look during part of her interview last week with ABC's Charles Gibson.
The primary reason why the Palin bubble will burst is that the media will decide that they are bored with her. They'll need to move to shine a light on a fresh issue or individual.
This is how the world works in the age of 24/7 news cycles. Whether the subject is Britney Spears, Michael Jordan or Sarah Palin, we inevitably raise stars to mythic levels, out of all reasonable proportions. Then we knock them down. (Look out, Michael Phelps. Your time is coming, too.)
It isn't a case of quixotic behavior by reporters and editors. Internet sites, blogs and cable news operations all thrive on presenting fresh headlines and updated story angles as often as possible so readers think we're on top of things. The news world moves at warp speed.
Palin's story is especially captivating because she emerged as an overnight sensation. The governor of Alaska was virtually unknown on the national scene before Sen. John McCain tapped her to be his running mate. Amid the media crush accompanying her rise, it now seems as if Palin has been around forever.
For as long as she has been in the public eye, people have been skeptical about her qualifications, but the allure of her beginner's pluck catapulted Palin to the covers of magazines ranging from Time to People.
The interview with Gibson may be remembered as the first brick being pulled out of the wall. The reviews weren't favorable from the media in the segments when Gibson asked Palin questions about foreign policy.
For instance, the New York Times called the exchange "strained." The Washington Post-owned Slate went so far as to say that "The ABC News anchor flummoxes the GOP amateur."
I'll be interested to see how Palin -- not to mention McCain and the Republican campaign machine -- reacts when the media's disillusionment sets in for real. Their actions may determine the course of the 2008 race.
If they handle the media's about-face with aplomb, her chances of looking, well, vice-presidential will be enhanced. But if Palin's handlers blow it out of proportion and show a strain, their behavior will reflect negatively on her.
Gibson, as dignified a newsperson as America has now, treated Palin fairly and didn't resort to hectoring her with "gotcha" questions, either.
Palin's supporters may be chagrined that their candidate didn't sound more self-assured or expert when she discussed Alaska's relationship to Russia. But Gibson didn't try to trip her up. He pretty much asked the kinds of questions I would have put to Palin as well.
Gibson treated her with the respect befitting a vice presidential candidate. ABC, while discussing the interview Friday on "Good Morning America" unleashed political correspondent Jake Tapper to assess the "truthiness" of Palin's remarks on the ABC show.
The television networks appear to be treating Palin carefully, trying hard not to seem sexist or liberal or come across as intellectual, big-city bullies.
When ABC noted that Tapper had found a few holes in Palin's comments (though nothing earth shattering), the network took pains to add that it, too, would be dissecting the statements of Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee.
Specifically, Palin seemed to have little idea about the Bush Doctrine, in which the U.S must spread democracy around the world to halt terrorist acts. When Gibson put it to her and asked if she agreed with the doctrine, she answered, "In what respect, Charlie?"
Some analysts have suggested that Gibson knew more about the Bush Doctrine than the vice-presidential candidate.
"She sidestepped questions on whether she had the national security credentials needed to be commander-in-chef," the Associated Press noted.
Since we're all clear on the nuances of the Bush Doctrine, we can move on to the Fickle Media Doctrine.
Now that we've built you up, it's about time for us to knock you down.
Can Sarah Palin withstand the body blows that are being inflicted by the national media?
The media aren't the bad guys in the Palin discussion. It's easy to accuse us of acting like sexists or big-city egomaniacs. Let's be real, though. McCain selected Palin for exactly those reasons - because she is a woman from a little-known state, who can take some of the heat off McCain and behave like an attack dog against Barack Obama. So far, the Republicans' plan has worked to perfection, as Palin has dominated the political discourse over the past few weeks. Now we'll see if she has the right stuff to go the distance.
Mr. F. Why didn't the "media" pull the same plug or burst the "bubble" on Obama? Answer: You and the "media" are in the tank for him. You disengenuous putz.
OMG!!! You'd think he'd at least use the same fraudulent definition of the "Bush Doctrine" that his boy Charlie cited.
What a freakin' MORON!!!!!!
Since when did anyone in the msm try to build Gov Palin up? All they’ve done since day one is trash her and try to tear her down.
She goes up, they go down and they can’t stand it.
Nonsense... the “phenomenon” continues and will continue precisely because the media simply can’t let go — without rational thought, they launched onto an all-or-nothing campaign to destroy Palin, and the longer she survives it, the shriller and more desperate the media becomes about it.
Of course, even here we see the latest change in the line of attack — originally she was an “inept” choice that was going to DOOM McCain. Now she’s some sort of “carnival sideshow” that’s just a passing fancy in the news.
Yes, the initial furor will eventually die down as the crack (or at least, crack-consuming) media fail to generate any significant “dirt”, and they will shift to ignoring her in hopes of diminishing her via silence rather than by storm. But she’s more than just a “story”. She’s their worst nightmare: a strong, intelligent, successful, CONSERVATIVE woman who got where she is on her own merits, and not any type of “equity” program.
She’s the antithesis of the “victim” club. And the “abortion uber alles” NOW gang. And the Beltway insiders who demand that all candidates by hand-picked and approved by the appropriate power brokers.
This is the same group that thought Reagan was “just an actor”.
The think Palin’s appeal is just superficial, when in fact it is her substance.
Obama’s numbers were dropping steadily in the 60 days prior to the conventions. McCain’s numbers weren’t moving much at all. The Palin pick pushed McCain’s numbers up and solidified his base. And Obama’s numbers continue to slide. I believe it is quite true that the novelty will wear off Governor Palin just as Obama’s did. The question is will that result in McCain’s numbers falling or will he sit at about 50% for the rest of the campaign?
In my opinion McCain’s numbers will ride at about 50% - maybe a couple of points higher - from now until the election. Obama’s will slowly fall. The final result will be in the 47-53 range with McCain on top. Independents like Palin. They don’t like Biden and Obama has already pulled as many from that group as he is going to get.
I am stunned at the sheer arrogance (or is it hubris, to use a Charlie Gibson term) of this article. Does he really think that Sarah Palin is a media creation, much less that the media has propped her up so that it can knock her down later?
Obviously, this guy hasn’t read the recent polling data (e.g. Gallup) about what the voting public really thinks about the role of the media in this year’s election.
Jon Friedman Is Extremely Embarrassed That He Sold Out, Went To The ‘Time 100’ Party, And Spent The Entire Time Awkwardly Ogling Models, Wolfing Down Baby Lamb And Nursing A Harvey Wallbanger Man-Crush On Rick Stengel
“I am a lousy martyr,” writes Jon Friedman, in the latest gripping edition of MarketWatch.
Then, since he was already on an honesty kick, Friedman also confessed to being grammatically-impaired, incurably verbose and a poor dresser.
Okay, fine, that last part didn’t happen. But then again, it wouldn’t have particularly surprised us, since it encapsulates the precise blend of honesty, integrity and unsolicited confessional we’ve come to look for in Friedman’s incoherent biweekly rants. And today’s column was true to form, grabbing our attention from beginning to end with Friedman’s pseudo-intellectual, feelings of “shame” over his having attended the Time 100 fete!
Stay tuned for Friedman’s shameful confession, after the jump
Guess who has more votes?
Exactly...
Remember their first reaction was that she wasn't acceptable because THEY had not “vetted” her. McCain has found a little of Reagan's magic by going around the establishments and the press and going straight to the “people” and it appears they like her.
LIES! LIES!! LIES!!! IT’S ALL LIES!!!!
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/5minute_arguments/the_lying_king.php
Friedman dissing Time (Dec. 20, 2006):
"Time reasons that Google, YouTube, Wikipedia and the other do-it-yourself innovations underscore how much technology empowers ordinary people and enables them to put their stamp on our society."
Jon Friedman Apologizes to Time Magazine, You, Me, and Everyone We Know by Matt Haber - June 20, 2008
Actually, the media told Freeper GVnana and a bunch of other people to go to the Palin Carson City Rally, and they responded like puppets on a chain.
Otherwise, there might've been one or two people there.
After a lib sent me the Palin interview, I sent him the Gibson-Obama interview (sample question: how does your grandmother feel about you) and very sarcastically described it using the Palin interview as my template (hostile, critical, loaded questions). He totally missed the sarcasm. Libs are blind.
The libs also don't understand that Palin isn't for them. The world doesn't revolve around them. Palin is for ordinary conservative Americans who want a conservative VP. The media reflexively attacks her for the sole reason that she is conservative and Friedman can't/won't admit that.
LLS
What was the size of his population sample, and what method of statistical analysis did he use?
CA....
Didn't get the memo.
Only one poll matters, and it’s in early November.
Friedman is a fool!
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.