Media Pressure Works: Palin to Be Interviewed by ABC

The New York Times reports that news organizations applied pressure and the McCain campaign has agreed to make Gov. Sarah Palin available to ABC for an interview.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< McCain's Wealthy Cabinet Picks | Doth Protest Too Much On Oprah's Behalf >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Good (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by nell on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:31:19 PM EST
    I am glad to see she will be doing an interview with ABC.

    However, I am not comfortable congratulating anything having to do with the media. Their pressure is not always right. How about the "pressure" they put on Hillary and Bill Clinton to apologize for so-called racist comments that were nothing more than the media working itself into a frenzy suggesting that saying Obama's position on Iraq being a fairy tale is racist. Are we really going to start lauding the news media for their disgusting and superficial reporting?

    The media is about nothing more than the media, they don't care about the voters and they don't care about the issues. You know why ABC is really happy? The interview will be HUGE, HUGE ratings...

    There was never any question (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by myiq2xu on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:31:50 PM EST
    about her talking to the media.

    They were just setting the ground rules.

    Exactly....it varies, Dan Quayle, 1 day (none / 0) (#36)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:31:19 PM EST
    after he was announced, Geraldine Ferraro, 6 days after she was announced...was just a matter of time it seems.

    I believe it was the first time (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:32:09 PM EST
    since that cell in Hanoi that McCain felt such pressure.  "OK, OK, I give up - give my VP selection a highly rated free media interview!!!"

    Lowered the bar again. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Chisoxy on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:35:31 PM EST
    And we played right into it. Let's say she passes this test and comes off as competent on matters, where are we then?

    She's well briefed... (5.00 / 0) (#12)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:43:40 PM EST
    ...and appears to be a very quick study. It dosn't bode well.  If she has done her homework she'll pass safely through most of the ABC interviews. Sheet... the interviewer will be scrambling to research her at all. The entire press corps have been caught napping.

    I suspect she will actually Clean Biden's Clock in her debate with him. There's a wierd parallel to Thatcher--Recall his connection to Neil Kinnock too.

    More distractions.


    Since this is an open thread, Marvin :-P (none / 0) (#14)
    by kredwyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:45:06 PM EST
    She will do fine because (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by fercryinoutloud on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:07:46 PM EST
    I've seen her interviewed already. Openleft had a youtube of her being interviewed by CNBC about the trooper deal and about the possibility of becoming the VP nominee (before she was named). She did just fine from what I saw.

    Here is the link to that interview.

    I think if caught in a pinch she is capable of doing the politician thing that both Obama and Axlerod did this morning which is when asked a question just start talking about anything and everything except of what was just asked of you. Works for them.

    If they are smart this ABC interview will be a one on one in a studio which is very pressure free compared to a press conference where questions are flying left and right with lots of 'gotcha' kind of questions.


    ha (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by connecticut yankee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:48:02 PM EST
    Oh yes, everything is a trap and a conspiracy. Its perfectly normal for her to give interviews, so expecting her to isnt exactly an unusual request.

    As Alter said over at Newsweek, they would likely get her one or two softball interviews.  It's impossible for her to go through the cycle with none.


    ABC had to give up something to get this exclusive (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by magster on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:39:13 PM EST
    like submitting questions in advance or limiting the interview to topics she's studied over the past week so that she looks competent.  No way Gibson has free reign to conduct an open-ended interview.

    Isn't it a rule of PR... (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by kredwyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:40:49 PM EST
    that you make the thing that everyone wants unavailable until the calls hit a point...and then you pump it up a bit more by offering a few of that item?

    Hollywood PR (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by dailygrind on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:21:47 PM EST
    You not only limit access you control who gets to talk to you. You control what gets to be asked. Liberals are so dumb. I say that as one. The same things we know in other context, we go brain dead in the political setting. The Republicans long ago mastered the art of media management. Meanwhile, we are happy just to get them to stop blocking us. It's quite sad.

    That's right (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by glanton on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:08:59 PM EST
    But it doesn't matter as much as many seem ti think.  Despite the complaining by BTD and many othersregarding the week long Palin-fest, it resulted in her extremism--and by extension McCain's--being exposed for Independents to see.

    I bet over 90% of the people who are going to vote this time, and the same percentage of Indys, knows Palin's views on abortion rights and on creationism, for example.

    Let McCain and Palin keep this crap up.  If this country's voters reward them, and they very well might--it won't be because the electorate thought the GOP had a moderate ticket, or even a ticket with ideas.....It will be other reasons....

    This election is a gut check for us, all of us.  A corporate hack like Charlie Gibson is, quite literally, beside the point.


    was that a question? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:45:22 PM EST
    Yeah you always leave them wanting more. But that's the first rule of dating.

    The ungettable get... (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by kredwyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:48:15 PM EST
    as it were.

    "Swingers" (none / 0) (#51)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:24:28 PM EST
    The McCain campaign is playing this (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:47:18 PM EST
    like a violin. And it's a Stradivarius. Underestimate them at your own peril.

    Yep..this is a text book campaign. (none / 0) (#37)
    by alexei on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:39:18 PM EST
    Hillary and Bill warned the Dems, but, who was listening?  BTD's "media darling" has just been replaced by the new Obama and the crafty, sly GOP.

    Reading this blog (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by LatinoVoter on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:52:51 PM EST
    and Taylor Marsh I'm left to wonder which Barack Obama is the one that is coming through to the American people.

    When I read Jeralyn I get the impression that he isn't fighting back or not fighting back hard enough and not engaging in the bread and butter issue that Americans care about.

    When I read Taylor Marsh he's found his lunch bucket and he's a fighter because he's rolled up his sleeves and isn't wearing a tie.

    Same campaign, same candidate two different interpretations. I'm curious which one is the one that most Americans are coming away with.

    The current polls support TalkLeft (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:57:54 PM EST
    If Obama has already "found his groove", then I would expect he would be doing better in the polls.

    up expectations like many online are unrealistic (none / 0) (#31)
    by dailygrind on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:25:04 PM EST
    where was bush in 2004 after his bounce, what about bush senior in 1992? do you know? if you don't then how do you know how to perceive of mccain's bounce after his nomination and free week of wall to wall marketing?

    Historically, (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:45:10 PM EST
    after both conventions are over, and we move into the general election, Republicans gain in the polls, and Democrats go down. Obama has no margin. The full bounce for McCain has probably not been reached yet. It doesn't mean that Obama will lose the election, but it does say that he not yet on a roll.

    Style vs. Substance (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by fercryinoutloud on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:12:39 PM EST
    Style, for 2000 & 2004 with (none / 0) (#54)
    by Blowback on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:36:29 PM EST
    Shrub & a beer. Style this year too, it looks like.

    Clinton only found (none / 0) (#22)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:00:41 PM EST
    that part of herself after getting hammered by Obama on Supertuesday. So Taylor is well off base here.  Obama has not yet begun to panick and dig deep.

    Clinton was not hammered on Super Tuesday. (none / 0) (#38)
    by alexei on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:46:46 PM EST
    She was hammered in the caucuses in February.  I do believe the panic has started.  It is the economy, stupid and they are letting the new Obama keep the spotlight.  BTW, what I saw on the trail were just snippets, but, if he really can come across as authentic (which I have doubts) and he takes Clinton's lead on the issues, he can pull a Clinton and still win this thing.

    Still, you really got to admire the media manipulation and getting under Obama's skin and using the new Obama.  Brilliant tactics and strategy!  Way too bad the Republicans can't govern, because they sure can get elected.  


    obama lost super tuesday (none / 0) (#41)
    by sancho on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:57:11 PM EST
    doesnt seem to bode well, does it?

    What digby Said (5.00 / 6) (#21)
    by kaleidescope on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:00:03 PM EST
    Here's what she said:

    They are going to work themselves into a frenzy over this. And the right will hold Palin off just long enough for the outcry to become deafening. And then Palin will appear in front of a gargantuan television audience (again) on something like 60 Minutes --- and do quite well. They are already working the media hard to make sure they don't go for the jugular -- and they won't.

    As usual, digby makes depressing sense.  All the clamor for Palin to be interviewed succeeds in setting the bar so low that when she performs relatively well on a toothless interview, she'll be spun as the second coming.  Who's going to be interviewing her?  Mr. capital gains tax cut, Charlie Gibson.  Remember how he performed during the Democratic debates?  Wanna take any bets on whether he gives Palin a serious grilling, showing clips of her telling Congress, "thanks but no thanks" about the bridge and then pulling up all her statements in favor of it?  Gibson will be eating out of Palin's hand.

    This is why the GOP (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:07:01 PM EST
    do not select lawyers as their Chief.  They select professional actors instead.  The main legacy of Reagan if you like

    Even if he's done the research to grill her she'll do what she needs to do. The expectations are so much lower than Bush in '99--she's the No2 and she's a former beauty queen and she's a novice and she's only just popped onto the radar--and fatally for Obama chances in November, the media piddled on Hillary Clinton in a completely disgusting and unfair way.  The GOP clearly have teh momentum and if she's just professional, demure and cleverly echo's a few of Clinton's rhetorical tricks she'll crush any attempt to ambush her.


    Martha Raddatz should be the interviewer (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by shoephone on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:39:52 PM EST
    Then we might actually find out what, if anything, Palin knows about foreign policy and defense matters.

    CHarlie Gibson is a joke.


    Gibson will lay out a red carpet (3.00 / 0) (#34)
    by Faust on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:48:30 PM EST
    and grovel on it for her. That's what Gibson will do.

    Wow! This is just amazing. (none / 0) (#39)
    by alexei on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:51:08 PM EST
    The new Obama again!  I have never seen a VP get this much attention in all of my life! Yep, just like the speech only better!  What is the old Obama to do?

    So Jindal will also give a... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:09:53 PM EST
    ...testimonial about her and Hurricane Gustav as well?  

    There ought to be a live cam in the DNC right about now.

    media pressure (5.00 / 0) (#28)
    by AlSmith on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:15:43 PM EST

    This cryptic "media pressure" sounds like the worst thing in this story. The media gets together to demand concessions? Yikes.

    I hope we dont end up with one of these pointless trivial pursuit interviews. If Russert had asked The One the Medvedev question HRC would probably be the nominee.

    Lol Gibson (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Faust on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:47:10 PM EST
    yeah THAT's going to be a hard hitting iterview. That guy is a tool among tools.

    If Media Outlets (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by glanton on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:56:55 PM EST
    Continue to Hammer Away on Her Positions on Issues, then she will eventually have to speak to it. But either way, her positions on Issues are already out there. Video clips, links, quotes, and stories documenting her extremism and lack of substance are all over the Internet.  Even if Gibson grovels, and even if she is never asked a single tough question before election day, the average voter is going to know that she is of the extremist school.

    That's the good news.  There's lot of bad news regarding the electorate and regarding the way this is going, but ignorance re Palin's views is not a threat.

    On backgrounds and experience (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:36:47 PM EST
    Changing planes...so thought I would post this email from GretaWire blogger...I figured it would provoke discussion:

    Frankly, I am amazed by the amount of business that the Wisilla Econo-Lodge is getting from reporters who are running to Alaska in droves to find out what they can about Sarah Palin. She is the candidate for VP and little is known about her. So that is a good reason to go.
    But more importantly, little is known about the democratic PRESIDENTIAL candidate and no one is going to the south side of Chicago to talk to anyone who resided in the community section he was supposed to be organizing. No one has talked to anyone from that time frame who watched him do his job. Did that job consist of pep talks and speeches or did he actually organize anything for that community that stuck?

    more @ GretaWire http://tinyurl.com/6leul5

    You're linking to Greta Van Sustern? (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by shoephone on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:42:52 PM EST
    Fer Gawd's sakes. Sometimes I'm convinced this site has been taken over by right wingers.

    I heard recently, though, (none / 0) (#49)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:02:32 PM EST
    that Greta's husband is an active democrat. I can't remember what he's working on, but it made me wonder if she's a Republican.

    Isn't hers more a legal show?


    actually found it on another site (none / 0) (#50)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:04:08 PM EST
    thought it was interesting as there have been many discussions about CO vs STM, etc and whether the focus should be on the experience issue or issues. And she's wondering what many have. What did he do as community org etc.

    But hey, if you want to think I'm a right winger, feel free, no skin off my nose :) At least I didn't link to the orange thing, lol!~


    Oh, boy, Charles (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Blowback on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:28:49 PM EST
    Gibsin!  I bet he eats barracuda alive! Ed Murrow reincarnated. Not. Such bs. lk h will ak real qustions. Did you see his fake intellectual debate pose with the glasses on his nose, a la Sen Carl Levin?

    And now we have to rely on ABC (4.25 / 4) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:33:37 PM EST
    to actually engage her on the issues instead of prattling about her daughter.

    I won't hold my breath.

    She could have chosen FOX (none / 0) (#8)
    by myiq2xu on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:39:05 PM EST
    but even if she picked MSNBC do you think KO would have been tougher on her than he was on Hillary?

    I don't think any network is up to it (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:15:24 PM EST
    Except maybe PBS.

    Did you read the link? (none / 0) (#13)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:44:27 PM EST
    Charles Gibson is the one that... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:34:14 PM EST
    ...George Bush favors when he wants to do an interview.

    I believe Greta went up to (none / 0) (#29)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 06:18:25 PM EST
    Alaska and I 'think' she's running a story Mon. night.

    new poll (none / 0) (#47)
    by NJDem on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:50:24 PM EST

    McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama by 50%-46% among registered voters, the Republican's biggest advantage since January and a turnaround from the USA TODAY poll taken just before the convention opened in St. Paul. Then, he lagged by 7 percentage points.

    But can this be right?:

    In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/-- 3 points for both samples.

    I know it's just one poll, but the first from this weekend (non-Daily-tracking) right?