RSS
Twitter
Sarah Palin Joins Al Gore In Not Realizing That Everyone's A Reporter These Days
from the something-in-the-veep-sauce? dept
Last year, we wrote how odd it was that former VP Al Gore banned reporters from a speech he gave, where all audio-video equipment was also banned. These days, such "no reporters allowed" speeches make no sense -- because anyone can be a reporter. Yet, it seems that there's something in the veep sauce (or veep wannabe sauce) that leads to these sorts of positions, as former VP candidate, Sarah Palin, is trying to do the same thing, barring "reporters" along with any kind of recording devices from a talk that she is giving. You can understand, perhaps, why politicians like to do this, but it seems both out of touch and completely pointless. Every single person in that room can be a reporter in one way or another -- and it doesn't take a recording device, but a pencil and some paper (or a decent memory). Trying to block out the "official" press is just a waste of time.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
Deniable
But if there is no actual recording then there is deniability.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Deniable
Not if there are multiple witnesses.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Deniable
And THAT's when you upload the video to YouTube. Hanging morons with their own words has never been easier.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Deniable
No. Deniable is right. It doesn't go viral when there is no recording to put on YouTube. Multiple witnesses be damned.
Witness testimonials of a gaffe or a dumb statement are simply not sensational, there is no schadenfreude, and it doesn't spread as widely.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Not All Recording Devices, Only Socialist Ones
I’m sure Sarah Palin will be happy to allow patriotic recording devices that won’t twist her words into some kind of irrelevant “meaning” and meaningless “context” that has nothing to do with what she was thinking when she spoke. The trouble is, none of these gadgets are made in the good old US of A any more, so you simply cannot depend on their loyalty. I don’t think she’s blaming the reporters at all, just their use of electronic products made in atheist-socialist countries.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Not All Recording Devices, Only Socialist Ones
Yeah, freakin' liberal media bastards.
Hey where the F are my sarcasm tags?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Not All Recording Devices, Only Socialist Ones
"...what she was thinking when she spoke."
That's a good one.
CBMHB
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
nothing new here
sarah palin has never been adept at managing the media. after she was nominated for vp, it was several days before she gave any interviews at all. the result was complete abdication of her message to the media feedback chaotic amplification loop. when she finally did give interviews, the scrutiny was so intense that her actual message was lost.
sarah, if you've got something to say, get out and say it. if you make a foolish remark from time to time, that is ok as long as it is a small percentage of what you've said. jesse jackson, joe biden, and a whole pantheon of public figures have said something difficult to explain, but since it is a small percentage of their total verbal output people are willing to cut them a little slack.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: nothing new here
Not sure I agree. She came out swinging, she had huge momentum after the debate. What really killed her was the interview with Katie Couric.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
Actually, what killed her was that she had to spend all her time reading newspapers. You know, all of them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
Gotja journalism, asking questions about the Bush Doctrine ... a real patriot would've been throwing softballs. /s
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
"What really killed her was the interview with Katie Couric."
Not being able to name a news paper she reads looked pretty bad, even though fewer and fewer people are reading the damn things. The interview with Charlie Gibson though, that made her look like an infant. The way he looked at her down his nose and throgh his glasses at her after asking her about the Bush Doctrine... brutal.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
Um...
There's a big difference between swinging and connecting.
Gotta do both; otherwise you look like a retard. Which she did spectacularly.
CBMHB
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: nothing new here
Can't agree with you on the Biden comment. Joe Biden says something nonsensical and/or stupid virtually every time he opens his mouth. He actually makes Sarah Palin look really smart in comparison, and she's about as intelligent as a bag of hammers.
Hail Xenu (and Seth) !!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
Ha ha, finally a Hot-Palin fan :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: nothing new here
Do not confuse foolishness with ignorance
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: nothing new here
So you're saying Biden's actually intelligent, but also a fool? The man is a walking gaffe machine, and has been a source of embarassment to this country for decades. At least Obama has the good sense to keep him pretty much under wraps most of the time, although that's probably the only good thing Obama has done to this point.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re: nothing new here
"So you're saying Biden's actually intelligent,"
Where, exactly, was that stated?
You compared two people, one foolish and the other ignorant.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Aww Not Again
I can see Russia from my house
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Aww Not Again
I said "thanks but no thanks" to my sanity after listening to her interview(s).
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
So, she might have been being dumb. But might she have also been trying to get publicity? Secrecy is seductive. People might pay more attention to her words if they came from a "no reporters allowed" event.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
If a tree falls in Russia, can she see it?
Anyone can be a reporter, but who would want to care what she says.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: If a tree falls in Russia, can she see it?
Good point, amazing that people still are talking about this clown.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It josu thrills me how everyone fears Sarah
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Yeah, especialy when people in the crowd shout things about killing candidates and the speaker does nothing about it.
That sort of thing is really thrilling, isn't it?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It comes down to trust...
We recently ran a customer, partner and prospect event and while we know that some of the content we presented might be regurgitated, even misquoted... we know it would be more so if journalists were present...and eager to get a "controversial" story that sells more pages!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Is there a ban on cell phones too? Wouldn't be hard to record the speech on a cell phone.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Please stop mentioning her name. She needs to fade into history, forgotten.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
That time of the month ...
I can see the moon from my house ... wheeee ... I guess that makes me an Astronaut. Ummm ... mention whose name?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
With no recording devices allowed, people can mis-quote her all they want and there's no proof that she didn't say it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Palin's problem is if a quote sounds stupid enough there is no way that some people could ever believe that she couldn't have said it.
She probably just wants to be able to give the same speech over and over again. If a tape gets out she is like the comic who just did the HBO special and needs all new material.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sarah Palin is an idiot
Sarah Palin is an idiot
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sarah Palin is an idiot
@Kraig: "Sarah Palin is an idiot"
You, by comparison, however... whew. Pure genius.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sarah Palin is an idiot
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/idiot?jss=0
Umm, ok
This may be more applicable
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ignoramus?jss=0
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sarah Palin is an idiot
Nice! I like candid comments :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Fabio as running mate
Yeah, well, Scarah is pretty much a waste of time....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Banning reporters
The only reason a politician would want to ban reporters is to get all the free publicity that goes along with a ban on reporters. Reporters just love to report that stuff. And it's the only way Palin can get anybody to listen to her.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Its not about secrecy or privacy its about freedom of speech
It is her right to make that request. I see no difference between this event and event where a small group of people sit around the dinner table, in her home, having a conversation over a good meal. Denial ability or not, she is allowed her privacy.
Just because other people in the group can report on it doesn't mean they have too or even would want to, nor does it imply that what she is saying is private, confidencial or even secret. She has a right to ask its her condition for participation. Compliance to that request is the freedom to participate.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Its not about secrecy or privacy its about freedom of speech
I think that any citizen should be able to record anything that anyone says at any time for any reason, in the medium of their choice with or without permission from the party concerned. As president or vice president, Palin (along with our great nation of laws) would consider herself justified in recording any of her subjects at any time, for any reason, in the medium of her choice, so I believe that if she prefers not to be recorded, she should refrain from speaking. Wiretap laws and the like should be abolished. I am anti-patriot act, but if it must exist, it should be a two-way street.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Oh, please
There is a difference between what is essentially a public servant hosting townhalls and whatnot (and hence should have 1st Amendment rights to have stuff on public record) and private citizens giving commercial speeches.
Al Gore and Sarah Palin both have the right to restrict whatever they want in terms of recordings, because they are private citizens. Despite Al Gore being a blowhard spewing forth mass ignorance and nonsense every time he speaks on so-called AGW using crap data, I will defend to the death his right to restrict his speeches to those who paid to hear him speak. Similarly for Sarah Palin and her $100,000 per speech.
This is no different from people banning a/v capture equipment to circus shows or plays or concerts or whatever.
Now, what's up with all the hatin' Palin stuff? What does that have to do with anything? I happen to think that President Palin would have been a 100x better choice than President BHOmbastic, but so what? Neither my opinion nor anyone else's on this matter has anything to do with whether or not Palin or Gore are acting within reason in banning such a/v capture devices.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Oh, please
Except she is not a private citizen, she is former VP candidate and actively lobbying for supporters for a later bid. She is lobbying for people, she is using her notoriety to boost people. That makes her a "public servant". So, as she is doing this for a public lobbying group "Right for Life". This stops it from being a "private" meeting. If she wants privacy then she need to drop out of ANY governmental or public speaking.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Oh leave poor sarah alone .....
She is like the only politician I would do ..... what a GILF ... Big Ole Icky GRIN
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Yeah, Sarah never had a chance, with her extinct running mate, that really screwed it for the GOP. http://bit.ly/39oJo
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment