Okay, I’ve now watched ABC’s Sarah Palin interview excerpts on “Nightline” Thursday night, plus two more segments broadcast on “Good Morning America” today (Friday). A clear pattern has emerged: ABC’s heavy-handed editing is lifting Palin’s replies to questions out of context in order to undercut their coherence and substance.
Why do I say that? Because I have now seen the same questions posed by Charlie Gibson in these various broadcasts, and repeatedly, I’ve seen those questions paired with different fragmentary answers by Palin. Rather than allow her to be heard in her entirety on any given question, ABC yanks a one- or two-sentence snippet as a sound bite, sometimes blatantly cutting off Palin’s reply in mid-thought or even mid-sentence, as if that reply represents the essence or entirety of her position. Only by watching all these various ABC interview broadcasts — which are being scattered over a number of its daily programs in order to boost their ratings — can you get a fuller, in-context understanding of her responses, which are often far more nuanced than ABC’s editing makes them appear.
The only time that interviewer Charlie Gibson and Palin [are shown to] engage in an exchange of any length, it’s when Gibson presses Palin on the meaning of “the Bush Doctrine.” It is a clear “gotcha” question, intended to make her look like a confused rookie on foreign policy. But, as an ABC analyst just pointed out on “Good Morning America,” you could probably have asked that same question to 500 random people at the State or Defense Departments and gotten vacant stares or stammering replies. Palin’s full response — when shown last night on “ABC News” — turned out to be a solid defense of the doctrine of pre-emptive military strikes in the case of imminent threats. On “Good Morning America” today, however, that answer is deleted, and in its place ABC’s editors substitute a vague sentence, obviously one of those that preceded her more definitive statement. The vague sentence gives the impression of evasion and lack of knowledge; “GMA” viewers would never know that Palin had said anything more.
Folks, this is dirty pool. And I have a suggestion as to what to do about it.
First, I think you should write ABC News demanding a release and posting of the full transcript of the interview, rather than these out-of-context clips.
Secondly, I believe that the McCain campaign should post, on YouTube or on their website, whatever video or transcript they may have of the ABC interview. The comparison between the full interview and ABC’s hatchet-job version will once again demonstrate the blatant bias of the MSM “news” outlets in their treatment of Palin.
UPDATE — More anti-McCain dirty pool, this time on the front page of today’s Washington Post. Sickening. And check out this Freudian slip from CNN’s John Roberts.
UPDATE #2 — On the good-news side of the ledger, Gallup now shows congressional races dramatically tightening, with Republicans closing in on the Dems. I attribute this almost entirely to Palin’s coattails — er, skirt.
Update to this Update — The polls are starting to agree, and in McCain’s favor. Overnight, McCain has moved from a tie with Obama to a three-point lead in Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll of likely voters. Meanwhile, yesterday’s Gallup tracking survey of registered voters continued to show McCain with a four-point lead. [Also: The Intrade Prediction Market is speaking, and as I write, investors are betting on a McCain victory over Obama by a seven-point margin.]
UPDATE #3 — Is it me, or is Sarah Palin’s voice very much like that of Jodie Foster’s, especially in the movie Contact?
UPDATE #4 — Even Kirsten Powers, a Democratic columnist, writes under the title “ABC Bungles,” saying, “The interview seemed to show a lack of good faith, with blatant misrepresentation….”
Robert Bidinotto is the editor of The New Individualist. Visit his blog at http://bidinotto.journalspace.com.
