9/14/2008
Nancy Kallitechnis, a supporter of Senator Clinton’s primary bid and member of a pro-Hillary forum site called HillaryClintonForum.net recently compared the questions asked of Governor Palin in her interview with Charlie Gibson to questions asked of Senator Obama by Gibson after he had clinched the Democratic nomination. It’s an elightening review:
Even the camera angle was designed to be prejudiced against Palin. She is filmed from the side and slightly with her back to the camera. Although there are close ups of her face the long shot shows her back to the camera. It seems filming her with her back to the camera was meant to make her appear less likeable. In contrast, the film crew placed the long shot camera facing Obama so at all times when he is speaking the camera looks him in the face rather than looking at his back.
And Obama was asked much easier questions mostly about feelings about winning, breaking the glass ceiling and 2008 campaign decisions. In contrast, Palin was asked numerous specific policy and military strategy questions that required extensive knowledge about treaties, U.S. anti-terrorism strategy and world history. And Gibson misquoted Palin falsely stating that she said our troops were in an alleged holy war when what she said was that she prayed that we were doing God’s will. The following is a breakdown of the questions asked of the nominees:
Obama interview:
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5000184How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?Palin interview:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09…with-abc-news/Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]There’s no doubt the Charles Gibson interviews showed extreme prejudice against Palin and extreme favoritism towards Obama. His manner towards Palin was much more negative. He asked her much more difficult questions and the questions were more adversarial. He constantly questioned her ability to lead but never questioned Obama’s ability to lead, all the more amazing considering that Palin was the only one with executive experience and the presidency is the highest level executive job in politics. The camera angles always focused on Obama’s face when he was talking making him the center of attention yet during Palin’s interview the angle often focused on her back apparently for the purpose of lessening the impact of her presence.
Part of the difference in the line of questioning might be the fact that Palin agreed to an open interview. She allowed Gibson to ask any questions he wanted. The Obama Campaign, however, might have screened Gibson’s questions before-hand and indicated which he was willing to answer. I would love to know for sure if this were the case with the Obama interview; wouldn’t you?
Personally, I don’t think Gibson was over the top in any way, but at times, when he’s sitting with Governor Palin, spectacles half-way down his nose and a sheet of paper on his lap, it looks as if he’s personally conducting a job interview. I’m not sure voters in general trust the media enough these days to trust in their objectivity. Voters will watch the interview and judge for themselves.
Finally, in regards to Palin’s supposed confusion on the “Bush Doctrine,” that’s actually a good thing in my book. If Palin had been intimately acquainted with that doctrine, it would have been used against her by the Obama Campaign. They would have run an ad with it and called her “more of the same,” as they tried to do on the day she was nominated.
No Comments
