Is Palin victim of media conspiracy?

Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > September > 03 > Entry

By Jay Bookman | Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 03:29 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The McCain campaign and much of the Republican Party are outraged at media coverage of Sarah Palin. McCain strategist Steve Schmidt set the tone perfectly Wednesday, whining about a “faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee.”

Well cry me a river. Let’s take that claim apart, and let’s start with this:

A relative handful of columnists and commentators and a larger number of bloggers have indeed wondered in public about Palin’s decision to accept the nomination so soon after giving birth to a son with Down syndrome, a condition that requires a lot of attention, and when she has a 17-year-old unmarried pregnant daughter. How, they have asked, could Palin do right both by her family and her country?

To the McCain camp, such questions constitute a “vicious and scurrilous” media campaign to ruin a promising conservative candidate, using sexism to do it. Is that true?

Fortunately, we have a similar set of circumstances to compare against the Palin case. In March of 2007, John Edwards decided to continue his presidential campaigning even after his wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer. The reaction will sound familiar.

Rush Limbaugh said the Edwards were turning their eyes to the campaign when they instead should turn their eyes to God. Katie Couric, in a “60 Minutes” interview, accused Edwards of mining his wife’s condition for sympathy votes.

“Even those who may be very empathetic to what you all are facing might question your ability to run the country at the same time you’re dealing with a major health crisis in your family,” Couric told Edwards.

And in Time magazine, columnist Jay Carney wrote that “surely many average Americans have to be wondering at what point the candidate will decide that his duties as husband and father to three children, including a 6- and 8-year-old, trump his duty to his country and the cause of winning the White House.”

Edwards is a man; he is also a liberal. Yet, he faced the same questioning and second-guessing that Palin is now undergoing. Why? Because human beings are drawn to human stories, and the media have an economic incentive to tell those stories, regardless of political bent.

The McCain’s camp complaint about a media “feeding frenzy” focused on Palin is even more precious. John McCain chose to introduce a totally unknown player to the national scene at a critical point in the campaign, and he did so by portraying her as a gun-toting John Wayne mother of five, riding out of the wilds of Alaska to clean up Washington.

And they claim to be shocked at the “feeding frenzy” they set off? In the first hours after the announcement, TV reporters had so little information about Palin that they were reduced to reading off Wikipedia for information. Of course, the media descended on Alaska to try to fill in the gaps as quickly as possible.

The story the McCain camp peddled was so appealing that Palin even drew coverage from US magazine, People and National Enquirer, outlets that would never have wasted ink on a Kay Bailey Hutchison or Tim Pawlenty. Their interest was human, not political.

The real reason Schmidt is angry is because the reporting has shown that so much of the original McCain narrative was untrue.

Palin was cast as a reformer who fought the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” But in fact, she ran for governor in 2006 as a champion of the pork-barrel bridge and “opposed” it only after it was clear the project was dead. We were told that Palin abhors earmarks, the special congressional appropriations that Alaska politicians have used to bleed billions from the American taxpayer. But it turns out Palin fought to get earmarks both as mayor and as governor, hiring lobbyists and going to Washington herself to bring them home.

It’s not the media’s fault that the cinematic story envisioned by McCain and his staff has fallen apart on closer inspection. They just didn’t do their homework, and they got caught.

Permalink | Comments (137) | Post your comment |

Comments

By Goldie

September 3, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

I love how McBush is supposed to be such a tough guy, and yet he keeps whining like a big cry-baby about all the media attention he’s finally getting.

Oh, boo-hoo.

By Midori

September 3, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

hmmmmmm………

popcorn? check

dr. pepper? check

think I’ll sit back and watch the fun…..

By FlaLady

September 3, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

You are way off base on this one, Jay. Take a look at the usual suspects: CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, HuffPo and even ABC, CBS, NBC. All of the attention Palin and her daughter are receiving centers around sexist, misogynistic drivel, lies and innuendo. Don’t be surprised if there isn’t a major backlash on this. I’m a centrist who also was angry by the treatment Hillary Clinton received by the media. This is even worse.

By hester

September 3, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this

So far about all Palin has said about herself is that she is “proud wife and mother”. That is the information she supplied. And that makes her family life open to comment. If she wanted her family out of bounds she shouldn’t have drug them in with her. She knew her 17 year old would be commented on — and the fact that her littlest one would be too. She just didn’t give a rat’s fart! Selfishness is a Republican value —but not mine! She is a Republican.

By AJC/DNC Management

September 3, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

She’s a victim of an idiot assault mob:

I have always tended to think that conservative complaints about the media are a little exaggerated. There are occasionally obvious instances of bias and clear examples of a double standard, but most reporters don�t want to fall into those and some conservatives are surely too sensitive to them. But this week has changed my view. I have never seen, and I admit that I could never have imagined, such shameful, out-of-control, frenzied, angry, condescending, and pathetic journalistic malpractice. The ignorant assault on Palin�s accomplishments and experience, the breathless careless airing of deranged rumors about her private life, the staggeringly indecent mistreatment of her teenage daughter in a difficult time, the ill-informed piling on about the vetting process, the self-intensifying circle of tisking nodding heads utterly detached from a straightforward political event, have been amazing and eye-opening.

By @@

September 3, 2008 4:01 PM | Link to this

Because human beings are drawn to human stories, and the media have an economic incentive to tell those stories, regardless of political bent.

Well Jay, I can’t say that’s true for me when it comes to politics, but whatever…….

Anyhoo, it’s rather sad that the media would choose to plunge that economic incentive right through the heart of a 17 year old girl.

To be honest, I was a little put out with Edwards at the time when his wife’s illness intersected with his campaign. Then I thought, what the hay! If his wife’s on board, who am I to judge? They’re adults after all.

Later on, and with little, if any coverage at all, from the liberal media, I find that someone else was puttin’ out for John.

In the first hours after the announcement, TV reporters had so little information about Palin that they were reduced to reading off Wikipedia for information. Of course, the media descended on Alaska to try to fill in the gaps as quickly as possible.

Now ‘ya see ^^^ there? That’s a liberal media’s impatience. Can’t wait, JUST CAN’T WAIT!!!! Wait for what would be my question — all the truth, lies, and innuendos that are fit for print.

All in a day’s work for those invested in OBlahMa.

Oh, btw — over at Wooten’s? There’s another OBlahMa (leftist) supporter who’s promoting something called “The Blossip” where supposedly there are pictures of Palin’s daughter drinking. On the site it said “We know BO said to back off, but we just couldn’t let this go unnoticed.” (Paraphrased) headline: “Drinking Babies at the Trashed Trailer Park in Alaska”

Do you want me to direct them to your site Jay? It’ll up your numbers. Not many conservatives posting there or here. I suppose that can be attributed to our inability to engage civilly?

I’m paddlin’ upstream from your river of tears Jay.

By Bosch

September 3, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this

I think Jay pretty much said it all

“Cry me a river” but I would have added, wingnuts afterwards.

Jay’s much more gentlemanly.

Gotta run! I haven’t won the lottery yet (although I’m intrigued by this person who still hasn’t claimed it in Mableton - I’ve checked my ticket) -

Gotta pay the tax man!

Have a pleasant evening.

By Bosch

September 3, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

Oh one more thing:

And Jay,

Heard this on NPR - they changed her Wiki page the day before the announcement.

By @@

September 3, 2008 4:14 PM | Link to this

hmmmmmm��

popcorn? check

dr. pepper? check

think I�ll sit back and watch the fun�..

And I see Midori has “slouched down” to enjoy her favorite soap opera HERE. Hoping beyond hope that she’ll be able to contribute to the script.

You go girl. We women have all gotta stick together, right?

By TW

September 3, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

Goldie - McSame’s doing that old man crying thing - he can’t help it. Most men get that way when they get close to the dirt nap. Look at Bush Sr. - cries all the time they say. Nothing wrong with crying, don’t get me wrong - I’m just glad compassionate conservatism is back and will be able to comfort the Senator from Arizona when he gets trampled this November.

By Winston Smith

September 3, 2008 4:35 PM | Link to this

How ironic that Bookman’s case study for this opinion piece is John Edwards. Yes, I remember all of the media hounds sniffing for dirt around his presidential campaign run—oh wait, that was only the National Enquirer doing the job this summer that the media should have been doing months ago. Yes, I remember how the uber-conservative Katie Couric and all of those right-wingnuts at Time raked John Edwards over the coals with their loaded questions and wicked insinuations—oh wait, those were actually open invitations for Edwards to tear up as he talked about how his love for country kept him going through tough times. The appropriate analog here is not Edwards, but Clarence Thomas—derided, mocked and defamed on mean-spirited grounds over and over again despite overwhelming evidence of his remarkable intelligence, qualifications and integrity.

And Jay—try doing some original journalism instead of just warming over the makeshift anti-Palin claims trotted out by Huffington Post and Daily Kos. You embarass all of us who actually have to claim the AJC as our hometown paper.

By T

September 3, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this

I don’t know if it is sexism. I think the articles about her daughter are cr@$^. Just like the ones about Obama’s wife. So I don’t read them. Maybe I will. I don’t think that it will change my opinion of McCain. Still scary.

By cataplasm

September 3, 2008 4:40 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the Republicans can complain about the media investigating Palin. She is an unknown from the middle of nowhere. It is arrogant to expect that we will simply accept the RNC press releases without question, especially after being misled on the Iraq war.

If some of the RNC/McCain statements about Palin had not fallen apart under initial probing this may well have become old news. As it is there is enough smoke to suspect a fire may exist. I applaud the media for their action and would do the same if they were doing it to a Democrat.

I agree that Bristol is a non-combatant in all this and should be left alone but, given her mother’s views on sex education and it’s apparent failure to protect Bristol from an unwanted pregnancy I believe it is fair comment to link the two.

By David Bruce

September 3, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this

While I am a Democrat and am voting for Obama/Biden, I feel for Palin’s predicament. Unfortunately it’s the way of the press when you are in the public eye, and she couldn’t be any more in the public eye than she is now.

All in all, I think this election cycle has not been nearly as divisive as those in the past. I think that the American media have moved more toward the mundane drivel that used to be owned by People magazine to gain reader interest. I don’t happen to like that kind of news, but that’s why I usually read the paper or the internet, so I can skip it by.

By Mike

September 3, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

Another lame partisan attack, but hey what do you expect from Bookman? Something outside of standard partisan bounds?

Not likely. Whether it is Michael Savage with mindless hate or Bookman with his mindless hate, its all the same.

How are the clicks coming Jay? Hope your selfish and corrupt racket to secure your undeserved job at the expense of your scammed advertisers and your paper’s reputation is paying off.

Keep turning those pages Jay, even if it is the same 50 people you cultivate and goad all day long. Now that is some advertising value. It’s as valuable as throwing a pile of direct mail in the garbage. Regardless, it sure isn’t preventing the AJC from sinking at a much faster rate than industry average.

But you don’t care about any of that, you just want to turn your clicks for your own selfish purposes as the AJC lays off real journalists who actually contribute something to society besides Keith Olbermann’s crib notes.

By The Jerk Store

September 3, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this

I am a human and when it comes to politics I don’t much care for human stories. Our founding fathers would turn over in their graves if they knew or heard what politics has become…

By Goldie

September 3, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

An advisor for McBush stated the other day in the Washington Post that “this election is not about the issues”, so I guess McBush’s campaign has laid their personal issues wide open for the media and everyone else to try and digest.

Once again, the Repugs showing what incompetent boobs they really are.

By Goldie

September 3, 2008 5:11 PM | Link to this

McBush prefers that America and the media not talk about today’s issues:

Campaigning in eastern Ohio, Obama noted that McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said the election would be decided largely on voters’ perceptions of the candidates’ personalities.— “This election is not about issues,” Davis told The Washington Post this week. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”

By Goldie

September 3, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

Another lame partisan attack, but hey what do you expect from Bookman? Something outside of standard partisan bounds?

Another Repug whiner — Give it up, Mikey. No matter how much you hate reading anything outside of your very narrow view, you keep coming here to this blog and whining about “nobody writes what I tell them to!”

Get over it. Start your own blog.

By Mike

September 3, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

“By Goldie

Once again, the Repugs showing what incompetent boobs they really are.”

Hey Jay. That clever and insightful statement should be worth some of the clicks that you value above all.

Who needs reporters who actually go out and inform readers? All you need is a partisan hack and a comments section.

Why get your clicks from a large user base who wants to be informed by facts when you can fire the staff, keep a few partisan hacks and let Goldie do the work for you. It’ll be years before the advertisers catch on that their advertising dollars are being wasted on a tiny collection of nuts (myself included) who don’t look at the ads at all.

By Bush go away

September 3, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this

Now Cindy McCain has joined in the sheer, abject, total, stupidity by claiming that Palin is a foriegn policy expert because Alaska is the closest state to Russia!

What’s next, saying that because McCain’s home state of Arizona is closer to the equator than Obama’s home state of Illnios that makes McCain more qualified to talk about global warming?

Grasping at straws, grasping at straws.

By AJC/DNC Management

September 3, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

By Bush go away September 3, 2008 5:27 PM Now Cindy McCain has joined in the sheer, abject, total, stupidity

Considering how little that Fake Temple Pilot knows, Cindy McCain could have said Sarah’Cuda knows more about foreign policy than Dimwit does because she owns an Irish Setter, she wouldn’t have been lying.

Unless, of course, he had his teleprompter with him.

By findog

September 3, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

The issue is that the first daughter of Alaska is not getting married until after the birth because she would be off of the Governor�s medical insurance benefits so Bristol and Levi start out with a government freebee.

That flies in the face of two GOP stances.

First is personal responsibility and not counting on the government to bail you out.

The second is that health care in America should be based on a market driven solutions and not government based coverage.

It is not that there is an unmarried pregnant teen of a politician (either party) it is that they a scamming the insurance industry for coverage.

By Robyn

September 3, 2008 5:57 PM | Link to this

The question of media conspiracy is clearly Republican Scare Tactics.
Why are the Republicans down on the Media for reporting on something that is so important to the safety and welfare of the American people?! What in the world are the Republicans trying to do? Are we under some sort of Dictatorship? We don’t even have the right to be concerned,ask questions and know every last detail about a person they pick out of the blue to possibly run our country? I believe the media should keep digging!!! We need to know everything we can about this already suspicious person named Sarah Palin. John McCain should come up with an another excuse for this incredible mistake he’s made. Gambling with our lives, how dare he!!!!

By N-GA

September 3, 2008 6:09 PM | Link to this

The GOP has insulted every American voter. Even the GOP pundits are dissing Palin in private, yet supporting her in public. You know, typical GOP hypocrisy.

History will say that Bush’s decision to invade Iraq was the worst decision ever made by a sitting president. This one will go down as the woest decision ever made by a predidential candidate.

Can you believe the B.S. spewing from the mouths of the GOP? Her overseas experience includes visits to Germany, Kuwait and Ireland. Then we find out Ireland was a refueling stop. They tout her role directing the Alaska National Guard (for 18 months) as military experience. Well, it certainly compares to GWB’s experience.

And her business experience? Working in the fishing industry. Not even mentioned in her work bio on the Alaska government website. I guess they had to make something up to reinforce her creds.

The GOP proved that American voters were gullible with the results of the last 2 elections. Now they want to prove that the voters are just plain stupid.

By Midori

September 3, 2008 6:10 PM | Link to this

Poll shows women don’t like Sarah Palin They are deserting the Republicans Speech today will be chance to fight back

ALASKA Governor Sarah Palin was a risky choice for John McCain - and the Republican presidential candidate is about to find out just how risky.

A national poll shows most US women are unimpressed as her stance on issues like abortion and pre-school education becomes public.

They have thrown their weight behind the Democratic ticket in the race for the White House, with 52 per cent of women polled saying they will vote for the all-male Democratic ticket of Senator Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and just 41 per cent said they would back Senator McCain and Governor Palin in the November election.

The poll comes as the McCain camp defends the vetting process used to select Governor Palin.

By Midori

September 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Link to this

McCain Camp Knocks Down Enquirer’s Palin Rumor

ST. PAUL, MINN.) � John McCain�s campaign threatened legal action against the National Enquirer today for running a story about McCain�s running mate, Sarah Palin, allegedly having an affair with her husband�s business partner.

�The smearing of the Palin family must end. The allegations contained on the cover of the National Enquirer insinuating that Gov. Palin had an extramarital affair are categorically false. It is a vicious lie,� said McCain senior adviser Steve Schmidt.

�The efforts of the media and tabloids to destroy this fine and accomplished public servant are a disgrace. The American people will reject it.�

The Enquirer also alleges that Palin unjustly fired a public safety official while she was governor of Alaska, but the story is based entirely on unnamed sources. The Enquirer has also paid sources in the past to speak with them, something mainstream media outlets do not do.

�Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin look forward to discussing the issues that Americans care about, fixing broken government, creating jobs, making our country energy independent and securing the peace for the next generation by bringing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to a victorious end,� said Schmidt.

does she, or doesn’t she??

only her hairdresser knows for sure……

By Midori

September 3, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this

Peggy Noonan, Mike Murphy Caught On Tape Disparaging Palin Choice: “It’s Over,” “Political Bullsh*t”

By jos

September 3, 2008 6:30 PM | Link to this

It is so typical of liberals to justify the absolute raping of a woman and her family. When someone questioned Michelle Obama on her “never been proud of America” comment, you’d have thought the world was coming to an end. Now she is off limits. Liberals always talk big about inclusion, but if a black or a woman dares not follow the liberal B.S. line, they bring out the big sticks to beat them down. Clarence Thomas was lynched and now they are raping Sarah Palin. Just another day in the liberal neighborhood. Go ahead Jay - rationalize all you want, rape is still rape.

By Paul

September 3, 2008 6:35 PM | Link to this

Jay

The title of your piece specified �media conspiracy.�

Your first examples of Republicans �doing the same thing� (is this becoming a justification theme?) was Limbaugh, a right-wing entertainer. He�d have attacked Edwards over anything. Katie Couric accused Edwards of using his wife�s condition to get votes, which is different than questioning whether or not he should have run in the first place. Her comment about his ability to focus � having a spouse with a terminal condition elicits a much more intense, consuming emotional reaction than raising a baby (even one with difficulties) or having a kid getting married and having a baby. Carney�s point was, I believe, that Edwards could find himself in the role of single parent while president � and that constitutes an ongoing situation that could be a problem.

I agree with your point about the media using any story to make money. But I notice you didn�t cite any articles about the Edwards situation as the � what � three front-page articles the NY Times had about Palin, or the other big-gun publications? I think �that� media is a tad different than Limbaugh or US Magazine.

Another difference � the Edwards story was broken by that paragon if investigative journalism, The National Enquirer. The Palin story � heavily by DailyKos-fueled rumors not that Palin�s daughter was pregnant, but that she�d had the baby and Palin foisted it off as her own. Would the truth have come out? Sure, it would have been released after the nomination hoopla had died down. Does anyone seriously think Sen McCain was going to say �here�s my VP selection. Here�s why I picked her. Oh, by the way, the media didn�t figure it out and hasn�t done any dirt digging, so let me lead by telling you all: her daughter�s pregnant!� (wild cheers and applause follow)�

McCain knew, he didn�t think it relevant. Score one for the maverick. Obama found out, he didn�t think it relevant. Score one for the classy guy. McCain chose to introduce a totally unknown player to the national scene at a critical point in the campaign? No kidding! Isn�t that part of the point in �creating a buzz� or �demonstrating I�m a maverick�? Totally unknown? I�ve listened to several media types who said they were aware of McCain�s interest but discounted it. Sounds like media sour grapes over poor investigations, lack of sources, Beltway thinking and getting a surprise sprung. Don�t you think it possible for a person to play the role of the office they occupy? And what gets politicians elected is �bringing home the bacon?� But as a member of a ticket opposed to earmarks, have the ability to switch gears? I agree the PR, if as portrayed, can be viewed as opportunistic or hypocritical. But she�s a politician. It�d be great if tonight she said �darn right I fought for money for my constituents. It was the system foisted on us by broken Congress. But now I�m part of a team to fix that.�

But why did you open the Pandora�s Box of earmarks? Get ready with the comparisons of Obama�s record to McCain�s �and the likelihood of who�ll veto an earmark-laden spending bill.

Hey N-GA!

Glad you�re back!

By AJC/DNC Management

September 3, 2008 6:44 PM | Link to this

Buh bye Peggy!

By Mr. Johnny

September 3, 2008 6:50 PM | Link to this

I’ve been a Democrat all my life. I’ve been tone deaf all my life. Until now. I finally hear what Republicans have heard since Goldwater � unmitigated, unchallenged, unashamed, unhinged liberal media bias.

By Midori

September 3, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this

The Palin story � heavily by DailyKos-fueled rumors not that Palin�s daughter was pregnant, but that she�d had the baby and Palin foisted it off as her own.

that’s not true, Paul — the Enquirer broke the story.

I posted the link in yesterday’s thread.

However, of course the internets are rife with gossip and rumors.

I remember the “investigative” team from Free Republic who posted about font size and type face to dispute the documents CBS used with the TANG/Bush AWOL story.