Monday, November 16, 2009

Did Palin hinder her reputation? Or was it Couric's and the medias fault?

I read an article in Time Magazine, "Palin on Oprah: Can You See the Real Me?".

It is about Palin's interview with Oprah this morning regarding her new book "Going Rogue". And the various topics they covered during the interview including Palin resigning from her position as Alaskan Govener, the family drama with Bristol's pregnancy, McCain's campaign, etc.

I thought it was erroneous that Palin blamed negative media interviews for ruining her reputation and campaign platform, especially Palin's infamous interview with Katie Couric. Couric showed no bad intentions during their interview, I got the impression that Palin was intimidated and failed to receive sufficient media training. With a background in PR, I don't think Palin, should gossip about blaming not only Couric, but the media in general for her poor interviews. And then announce, "she is launching her book, so American's can gain a better understanding of who she is." Instead she should be sincere and do something to gain respect since talking is meaningless, unless it is supported with actions.

For example, Obama and every president in political history probably suffered from negative coverage during poor interviews. In fact, I recall Obama saying "I screwed-up" on national TV within three weeks after his inauguration, and Clinton denying and confessing to his affairs with Monica Lewinsky. Regardless, I have never seen political figures solely blame a journalist nor media outlets for destroying their reputation or family drama.

According to CBS, "just 23 percent of those surveyed in a new CBS News poll have a favorable view of the former Alaska governor." Is Palin's reputation, a result of the medias fault for poor interviews? Did the media place an unethical bomb on Palin and treat her poorly? Or should Palin blame herself for her unfavored reputation?

3 comments:

Andrew Carpenter said...

Got ROUGE?

Dang... I've been calling it "Going Rouge," thinking it was some sort of light-sexist, Red-state pun... I like that better. Anyway, there ain't nothing rogue about a $5-million book deal.

Go here for a Going RogUE fact check... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/14/AR2009111400574.html

Also, its blame-the-messenger tactic is not new for the GOP. It's one of the three options that has comprised its entire playbook since Nixon rolled out his Southern Strategy.

valerie said...

It's hard to even conceive ( a familiar word to that family ) that Sarah Palin could possibly be a governor and a  vice presidential candidate !!Even unimaginably , I think I am better qualified, and could handle an interview with a journalist better than her!!!

I guess , that's part of what makes this country so amazing. That a person with so little experience, education and intellect could rise to such power, simply in my opinion, based on looks and charm.To hear her complaining that a journalist, just doing her job, was unfair to her, is preposterous,isn't that what journalists are supposed to do? I think she should fade into obscurity, but based on our insatiable need for more and more gossip on these nouveau celebrities , that will not happen so quickly.And why should it,we are elevating, her fame and she is making a fortune.

Michael Sweeney said...

Hitler wasn't really a bad dude. The media was just so incredibly rude when they covered him. If they had just been kind enough to let him explain himself, them I'm sure we would have got him.

Keep dreaming, Palin.