Palin Hiding from Press
In perhaps the most bizarre turnaround this election cycle, John McCain has turned what has heretofore been one of his chief assets — a warm relationship with the press corps — into a liability by taking extraordinary measures to shield Sarah Palin from questions.
She has been a candidate for the second highest office in the land for nearly a month, but Sarah Palin has yet to hold a single press conference. Now, the McCain/Palin campaign is attempting to take an unprecedented step in their apparent effort to protect Palin from having to face impromptu questions from national reporters.
Last night, the campaign provided locations for Palin’s scheduled meetings with two world leaders and Henry Kissinger to a network TV producer, who was assigned to provide editorial content on the meetings for the five television networks. The reporter was not going to be allowed to sit in on the private meetings but would be permitted to be on hand as still and video photographers took pictures at the beginning of each meeting.
But just a little more than an hour before Palin’s first meeting was set to begin, the pool producer was notified that he would not be allowed in to the photo spray. This means that the McCain/Palin campaign would get the benefit of free pictures of Palin’s meeting with world leaders without having to face the possibility that the candidate might have to answer a question from the media.
This follows numerous campaign appearances, including in public venues, where Palin’s handlers instituted a “no questions allowed” policy.
Naturally, most media outlets are less than enthusiastic about showing up to shoot photo-ops without the accompanying right to ask questions. CBS and others, in fact, simply refuse to send photographers unless they can also send reporters. Indeed, as Kenneth Vogel reports for Politico, there may be a press boycott.
Journalists, displeased with Sarah Palin’s efforts to restrict their access to her, are threatening not to cover her events surrounding the United Nations conference here unless they’re allowed more access. The unfolding boycott is the latest development in a rocky relationship between Palin’s handlers and the press, in which the campaign has sought to tightly control her interactions with the media.
[…]
But the imbroglio began developing Tuesday morning when Palin’s handlers informed the small print press contingent covering her campaign that the print reporter designated to cover the events, Elizabeth Holmes of the Wall Street Journal, would not be allowed to cover the sprays. The campaign’s reasoning was that there were not going to be questions or statements at the sprays, so they were only appropriate for photographers and cameramen.
The campaign also at first moved to bar CNN, the television network designated for pool duty, from sending its editorial producer — basically a hybrid print/video journalist — though the campaign budged when the network threatened to withhold its cameras as well.
The campaign ultimately relented, updates to both stories noted, and allowed Holmes in to “cover” the Uribe and Kissinger meets. But, goodness, why institute such an obviously stupid policy to begin with?
Yes, Palin is relatively unseasoned in national policy issues or dealing with top-notch reporters. But, surely, she’s mastered the art of the folksy non-answer answer?
And, frankly, she’d be better off giving weak answers than angering the national press corps. As documented on this blog and elsewhere, McCain often gets a pass for giving woefully bad answers and getting major facts wrong, even on issues in his areas of expertise, precisely because of his history of candor with the press. By letting them exhaust themselves with questions, he’s built a rapport with them and gets away — quite reasonably, in my view — with slipping up sometimes. By contrast, to so obviously avoid the press is to invite them to take a no holds bar approach to coverage.
It looks like they don’t want to give her a chance to say something stupid, or get stumped on a question.
That doesn’t change the fact that the entire policy is idiotic, because she is going to have to answer questions that her press handlers won’t be able to dodge, at the Vice Presidential debate. All this media avoidance strategy has done is ensure that the debate coverage will constitute an overly large factor in shaping public and press perception of her, so if she screws up (and that is entirely possible against Joe Biden, even with his tendency to mouth off), the screw-up will have a disproportionate impact on public perception.
If she does badly at the debate, expect this “no questions asked” policy to vanish in heartbeat. They’ll be rushing to get her out there, to dampen its impact.
I’m not so sure whe wouldn’t attract voters, that way. There’s a number of folks out there who think the press should be a little upset… and I’m one of ’em. And here’s the thing;
Maybe. But given what we’ve seen of hostile coverage of Palin thusfar from the usual suspects…(How many rumoers went unchecked from the DInosaur media?) one wonders if anyone would be able to tell the difference between the current situation and a more hostile media, or if such a thing is even possible.
I don’t know if it is wise, but there is a legitimate question of goodwill or good faith, and frankly, the national press does seem to be a little wanting in this category. How many in the press want a “gotcha” response out of Governor Palin versus, say, Senator Obama?
If you know all they are going to do is take pot shots, is it unreasonable to try and keep your head down as much as possible?
I give up, how many?
Dude, the press lives for gotcha answers. Doesn’t matter who they’re from.
Well Governor Palin certainly has as much experience with fiscal matters as she does with foreign affairs. She can see Russia from her house, and out the other window, she can see her bank.
And this is just laughable. As VP, Palin could conceivably become President. Do you think that Putin will show “goodwill or good faith” in negotiations? What about Kim Jong-Il? Or Iranian leaders, if it comes to that?
Not being willing to talk to the press because they might be a little hard on you is a sign of cowardice, pure and simple. And if the McCain campaign is afraid of a little press coverage, what does that say about how they will govern? Like cowards, would be my guess.
Say what you will about Biden–and I am not a fan–the man makes a gaffe just about every time he talks to a reporter, and those gaffes get covered. You don’t see the Obama campaign pulling him back because they’re afwaid of the scawy weporters, do you?
I’d like to believe that Alex, but too many journalists seem to be in the tank for Obama for them to want that on their resume.
I am trying to remember if there was any press outrage when Hillary Clinton would not allow press access except under very controlled circumstances and only with selected (favorable) press people. Or for that matter, Sen Obama doing much the same thing. Did the Democrats ever hold a debate on Fox?
Great beltway thinking James. The press will complain about whatever she does. If she was out there it would be overexposure. Why should republicans let there opponents in the media or politics dictate how they campaign?
Governors do not acquire foreign policy experience. When a guv runs for POTUS he has maybe a year behind the scenes to be coached. This is OK because nobody is born with that knowledge. So why would anybody expect Palin to be fluent after 1-2 months? She could and may be brilliant, but still only has a high level understanding after 2 months. Why would her competence be judged on that. Even a guv with a year to learn still would have too little background to speak fluently on foreign issues.
I’m with Bithead – how is the press going to treat Palin any different than they have before?
I hope the press does up their “fury” a notch. Maybe a reporter could do something or say something monumentally stupid and swing some votes McCain’s way.
James Joyner:
Actually, it’s worse than that. Media outlets were just asking for the right to have a reporter present during the photo-op. They weren’t being so bold as to ask for the right to ask questions. This is what they were trying to avoid: a 29 second appearance in which a single reporter wasn’t allowed to ask a question and couldn’t even hear most of what was said.
Think about it: The McCain folks aren’t just worried about Palin saying something dumb in answer to a reporter’s question. They’re worried that she might say something dumb in a brief exchange of pleasantries with Karzai.
What is she hiding?
Oh absolutely. But I think that a lot of that has to do with the “newness” of Palin. If she was smart, she’d get as much exposure as possible to mitigate the feeling. The press is fleeting in its coverage. Had she gone out on the interview circuit in the days and weeks following the pick announcement, the next car would have come along for the press to chase. Financial Crisis! would have distracted them enough and McCain and Palin could have continued with the campaign with much less to worry about. Now, press has lost interest in the next big thing and are back on Palin because she idled on instead of moving ahead. A dangerous move this late in the race.
Mike54:
I dunno. Maybe because the election is in November, roughly 2 months after her selection?
But, surely, she’s mastered the art of the folksy non-answer answer?
Apparently, the handlers in the Palin-McCain campaign aren’t so “sure” about that.
The problem with alienating the media is that they quit softpedaling, and you get news articles that begin like this:
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Less than a week after balking at the Alaska Legislature’s investigation into her alleged abuse of power, Gov. Sarah Palin on Monday indicated she will cooperate with a separate probe run by people she can fire.
If she was smart, she’d get as much exposure as possible to mitigate the feeling.
Exactly right. She should be cozying up to the press, telling stories, being folksy, bringing donuts.
Sad to say, that actually works.
Maybe their still getting her road teleprompter ready, or making sure she doesn’t say something stupid to offend the liberals like how they cling to their Oscar programs and abortion clinics, or maybe they are still trying to make sure she knows how many states we have.
Hiding, or showing them the respect that they deserve?
No, but Obama was on the O’Reilly Factor just a week or 2 ago. Remember?
Seriously, folks, the MSM was so ready to fawn all over Palin when her nomination was announced. You could tell…they were dying to do it, ready to pick up the “maverick” meme that’d become all but discredited.
I think the McCain campaign made a real mistake by not getting her out during the honeymoon period. In so doing, her negatives quickly became the story, and the McCain campaign has been relatively powerless to stop it. When a Republican loses Will, Brooks, and the WSJ editorial page, it spells real trouble.
McCain is even losing Broder. Then, time will stop and the Earth will crumble to dust.
Wow, Anderson @5:09. Ouch. That lede is accurate, but that’s a mighty aggressive way to put it.
@Rick Almeida
Sure The Obamessiah was on OReilly just the other day — that was AFTER a complete boycott of FOX for months. And that boycott worked, didn’t it. If OReilly had thrown any more softballs at Obama he would have been in a League of His Own….which was, of course, what the Obama wanted all along.
Dick Cheney did five (5!) Sunday shows the weekend after he was named to Bush’s ticket. Hell, even Quayle did press.
Do you want to argue that the press just became liberal in the last few years? Or is Palin just not half the
manperson that Dan Quayle is?Dodging the press is pathetic. If you can’t either charm, bambozzle, or out-argue a gaggle of reporters you have no business even considering a career in politics.
lol, once again I ask for you to name some?????
You can say whatever you want about the press, but the bottom line is the McCain campaign Obviously has no confidence that Palin can work without a net.
She is not ready to face “The View”, but she is supposedly ready to face Al Qaeda, Iran, and an economic crisis of historic proportions.
Sorry, does not compute. Bottom line is McCain made a political choice with the Palin selection, not a country first choice. Now they have to keep Palin under wraps, so that this does not become painfully obvious to all.
Better to sit there and let them think you are stupid than to open your mouth and prove it.
Advice I wish I would take from time to time.
Yup. I don’t like Cheney, but he is a formidable guy, an extremely intelligent and capable person.
Palin on the other hand, is in hiding. ’nuff said.
It’s funny to watch the way all these right wing partisan commentators and bloggers react to all this. By hiding Palin from the press, the McCain campaign has managed to embolden their base into believing that EVERY SINGLE REPORTER must be in the tank for Obama.
Who needs a press anyway? We don’t need to hear her respond to questions in real time when we already know she’s the foremost expert on everything! I don’t even know why we have elections or these stupid campaigns, obviously the only people capable of running this country should be just randomly selected from my party! Where’s triumph when you need him?
You haven’t exactly seen McCain on Olbermann, now have you? The Fox boycott was stupid on the Democrats’ part, but it’s not as if that stupid doesn’t cross partisan lines in the Presidential Debate.
I think it is more funny to see them squirm around the fact that you generally want such a little thing known as oversight regarding a candidate. Perhaps if we had had more of such an unusual substance as that, we might not have elected a “nice, folksy, conservative governor” back in 2000.
Well, tell you what; Let’s go ask Charlie Martin, shall we?
Of course, the list is by no means complete, but it seems a reasonable place to start.
lol she’s not ready for the View, Anjin your just made cause she wont go on your favorite show.
probably watching olbermann.
well sh-t I do, I guess I can’t be vice president, Dang it.
Actually, she should go on my favorite show (Mad Men) as she clearly needs a script and a scrubbed room before speaking to the American people. Don Draper could help her out…
Hey Bithead. How many of those were “yes” answers?
Please source the rest so we can confirm they’re rumors. No, Charlie Martin is not a source. Yes, you will need to link to someone actually spreading one as a rumor. No, you are not a source either. Yes, you are an idiot.
I don’t get it Bithead… about half of the things you listed were true… and some of the rest are so absurd you wouldn’t expect any coverage of them… and the rest… well… which one were not actually covered in the MSM. That was the question, wasn’t it?
The argument was, in effect, “Why should Palin agree to talk to people who won’t debunk obvious falsehoods about her?” Wasn’t it?
So, the fact that they report true statements, and in some cases don’t bother debunking the absurd — Trig is an alien??! You want the NYT to have a story saying, “Trig Palin is not an Alien”? What am I missing? If you the narrow the list down to actual lies about Palin that the MSM has not debunked, it would be more useful.
Martin will serve for this particular, since this place blocks me when I link more than one, and he’s got the stuff pretty heavily linked.
Clearly, but maybe I can help you out.
Tell me, Bernie… can you imagine the stuff hitting the fan if those same stories were posted about Obama?
For example, let’s get SNL to do a skit, written by Al Franken, where he’s charged with having sex with his daughters, and see what comes of it, shall we?
What does SNL have to do with the mainstream media? How is that a story? And do I really need to go into all the crazy anti-Obama stories? 10-15% of the country thinks he is a closet Muslim. Is there any crazy Palin rumor that has anywhere near that level of penetration?
And don’t call me Bernie. It is presumptuous and best, and rude at worst.
Blog posts from anonymous bloggers produce Saturday Night Live these days?
I mean, I know it sucks, but is that the reason?
Seriously Bit, refer to John Cole’s post above.
Or perhaps you’re a little late in the game for that now.
Wow, Bithead, with an imagination like that I’m hoping that you aren’t visited by Chris Hanson in the near future.
Imagination?
Seems you missed SNL. No matter.
Why not?
No offense…. didn’t mean to hit a soft spot… Friend of mine is named Bernard and everyone calls him Bernie, too. Course, he’s pretty easy-going, down to earth sort too. We DJ’d together for years. (Shrug)
Bithead, of that fairly extensive list only a small handful actually were covered by the media.
I’m sure any random person at MSNBC will be aware of less than a dozen of them actually existing. Heck, I’m not even sure that Martin isn’t making up half of them just to pad his list. If it gets no coverage, nobody is going to debunk it, because it effectively doesn’t exist.
I mean, we don’t take every stupid thing that G.A.Phillips or Zelsdorf says about Obama and claim it’s a rumor the MSM is refusing to debunk, so you don’t get to effectively do exactly that and play the Palin victimization bit.
Trust me, thats only one of the many, many reasons you won’t ever be vice president.
Yeah, the skit sucked, as do most SNL skits anymore, but it was obviously trying to mock the NY Times, not insinuate that there actually was incest. In fact, it was mocking the MSM for doing exactly what you are accusing them or doing, running unverified rumors.
So why didn’t they use Obama, instead?
It’s very clear why the right wants to have an extended dialog about an important issue like an SNL skit.
The McCain campaign knows that Palin is not ready to face the American people, the press and the world without training wheels, so the right is desperately (witness bithead) trying to alter the dialog.
I for one would really like to see Palin take a few questions about the economic crisis. After all, she may be Vice-President in a few months. (Though that’s less of a possibility every day as McCain’s numbers head south).
It’s classic GOP. We are at war, we have a vast deficit and an economic crisis of historic proportions. Let’s talk about a late night TV show.
This is more evidence for the “Palin was a desperately poor choice” pile. For informed voters this is much like a bad dream.
They had been doing skits about Obama for a while. They had been doing skits about all the candidates. They did Palin on this one because Palin was new, and SNL is obviously desperate for new material.
Bithead, did you actually watch the skit? They were making fun of the New York Times and making it look like most of their reporters were completely clueless when it comes to Alaska specifically and flyover country generally. I’d’ve thought you would have liked it. (It was also a pretty funny.)
“Maybe their still getting her road teleprompter ready,”
What? Obama is going to campaign with Palin?
It’s nice that folks are so well-informed about Palin’s religion and her family. But it would be even nicer if she would explain her position on immigration or health care, wouldn’t it? Does anyone on this thread know Palin’s position on NAFTA? Has she ever given it? How about minimum wage laws? Children’s health care insurance?
Anyone want to expound on Palin’s position on these?
That she is being hidden from the American public by the McCain campaign is nothing short of disgraceful.
Of course.
It’s likely still up on YouTube.
Of course so did a few million other people… and more than just watched the show. Interestingly enough, a goodly portion of these drew the conclusions I have here.