I came across an interesting article on the New York Times website and it was about Katie Couric's interview with Sara Palin. Couric's personal ratings had been low but were higher than most expected with the interview with Palin. The public wanted to see Palin and having Katie Couric interview her was a good move for CBS.
Sean McManus, who is the president of CBS News, commended Couric's interviewing skills but had to acknowledge Palin's presence in the higher ratings for the interview. America wanted to see this interview, we wanted to see what she had to say. There is more to come for Wednesday and Thursday night as well. Couric has interviews for each canidate for a special series during the primary season. Couric will ask Palin and Obama's running mate, Joseph R. Biden Jr., the same questions. I'm happy that Couric's ratings went up but it bums me out that they went up on Palin's coat tail, even if that coat tail is a negative one. CBS has had a number of complaints from the McCain campaign for Palin's interviews with Couric but no complaints had been made on CBS or Couric herself.
I feel like the media has already set a path for Palin. There have been many posts, blogs, newspaper articles, daytime television hosts, etc, that openly speak negatively about her so when she interviewed with Katie Couric, many minds were already made up. While I'm not the biggest fan of Palin I wanted to watch the interview with an open mind and actually listen to what she had to say without pegging her with things that I had already heard from the media around me. Unfortunately, I feel like few people did that but that's just my opinion. I'm sure the same thing will happen with Biden but for some reason I get the feeling that it won't be as overwhelming as Palin's aftermath. We'll see.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I agree with your opinion on the Palin-media relationship.
You said: "I feel like the media has already set a path for Palin." That's because they have. In my opinion, most media outlets DO already have set paths for not just Palin - but everyone.
To see an example of "set paths" in the media, just watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdKL2LW1xYM
I think that personal opinions are great, but journalists and members of the media are held to a higher standard. They should treat ALL subjects the same way. While a personal bias is impossible to overcome, it IS actually possible to conduct in an interview in a not-so-ridiculously-obvious way.
I think both "sides" (conservative & liberal) are guilty of slanting interviews, questions, news, and sound bites to suit their own agenda. No company (CNN, Fox, NBC, etc.) and no political party is exempt from this accusation.
You wrote: "While I'm not the biggest fan of Palin I wanted to watch the interview with an open mind and actually listen to what she had to say..." I'm sure that many Americans feel the same way. Maybe if enough citizens demand it, we will get a media that lets us all get information with an open mind. Both parties, along with the media, need to open up their minds and listen to the facts before they decide what to think.
I am happy that Katie Couric interview with Sarah Palin helped her ratings increase. However, I do not feel that this interview will be the backbone to keep Couric high ratings elevated. On the other hand, I feel that Joseph Biden interview may not be as overwhelming; personally, I feel that some people are still having a hard time excepting the fact of a woman being in charge.
hmmm...neutrality in news...? NAH!
Yep I hate it when I see a candidate I like getting slammed by an unfair and aggresive interview. I even hate to see a candidate I don't like getting slammed in interviews.
I think exclusive interviews gives the public a better look into the mind of a candidate than normal news. So I would hope interviewees would be given fair chance to speak.
Yes, I don't think anyone could disagree that the media seems to have taken a special interest in Palin. Whether they are just trying to report the facts or manipulate the public opinion to being negative towards Palin is something hard to determine, since it all seems negative.
I think there is a possibility though that the media may not all be doing this to create negative feelings towards her. Take Gannon's answer for example he said, "Yep I hate it when I see a candidate I like getting slammed by an unfair and aggresive interview." Some people will take the negative media and sympathize with Palin, potentially making them rethink their vote or swing towards that direction. Now i'm not saying that's what Gannon meant by his statement, but many people may be easily manipulated like that. Just a thought I guess.
Overall your post was very informative and I liked how you're keeping an opened mind and eye towards the debates.
This sort of thing is bound to happen. Many people are already going to have their minds made up, and the media is bound to portray the popular consensus.
If more people would develop a more informed opinion, the presidential elections would be a lot better.
I am watching the first and only Vice Presidential debate as I write this. I cannot help but think of the moderator Gwen Ifill, who has been accused of bias towards Sarah Palin. After all, she plans on having a book on the "age of Obama" coming out around January 20, the date the next president will be inaugerated.
Like Leah commented, the media HAS already established the way they wish their audience to perceive Palin. Their strategy is working.
It is often asked: Should Palin, a mother of an infant with down-syndrome, be running for such a position?
Just the other day a friend was saying how she thought Palin should stay in the home rather than pursue public office.
With the feminist movement flooding influence into our culture throughout the twentieth and now twenty-first century, it seems ironic that Palin should be accused of neglecting duties of motherhood to pursue public office, when women have achieved equality in public office, business, and the military.
Regarding Couric, I have heard heavy criticism from Republicans that Couric was unfair during the interview. The Democrats, on the other hand, have pointed at the interview as an opportunity to show Palin is not nearly as spectacular as she was portrayed to be when first announced as McCain's running mate.
As a republican, I hope Palin can prove the Democrats wrong. She is a spectacular person.
Did you know she also majored in journalism?
I think Couric's personality is better for day time and was too drastic of a change from Dan Rather. She should have stayed with a morning show but money talks.
The television media, with the exception of Fox News, is pretty liberal so yes they have an agenda.
I don't believe she was the best choice for a VP candidate. She was used as a pawn to get Clinton supporters and to match the hype of the first black presidental candidate with the first woman VP candidate.
Mitt Romney of Tim Pawlenty would have been better choices. If Hillary would have won the Democratic nomination Palin would not have been picked.
Post a Comment