Posted on 09/12/2008 10:57:47 AM PDT by thinkingIsPresuppositional
A majority of Americans recognize that the MSM has a bias, and a plurality understand that the bias is leftwards. That is good. But how many Americans catch every correction, every chastening by new media?
Recognition of the general concept of bias is not enough. People need to know of all the instances, such as this one:
ABC has released excerpts from Charlie Gibson’s interview with Sarah Palin, and in one of them, he attempts to catch her out by asking her to explain something she said:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
In fact, it was not the exact quote; and the way Gibson quoted her is a complete misrepresentation of what she said. It may, indeed, be close to the opposite of what she said... Read the whole thing!
If Gibson was fed bad information by his team, then the person on his team who did this should be drummed out of the industry. If Gibson himself knew, then he is a low creature indeed, and it is he who should be delivering pizzas, not our news.
Even if Gibson did not know, is there any doubt that if he were interviewing Obama, he wouldn't be asking hardball questions, he would be asking if he could wash Barack's car?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
It just shows even more how the MSM is trying to frame Palin and make her look bad, but it will backfire on them.
If this were an Obama interview, he wouldn’t be getting the tough questions. The MSM just seems to love him and they wouldn’t dare challenge him.
Assuming the rather preposterous notion that Charlie Gibson did not know the quote, and relied on the AP piece when formulating his questions, one must assume that he knows by now, right?
So, what is he going to do today? Is he going to admit his distortion? Or is he going to let it stand?
“During your ABC interview, Gibson misquoted you, and completely misrepresented your position on Iraq and God's will. Do you think that Gibson is a lying propagandist, or just completely incompetent?”
The left invents things, and believes them, and then the leftist media repeat them until there are thousands of people who believe them.
There's hope, folks!
Let me finish that sentence for you, "...used food."
There are two related events here. There is the interview prep followed by the actual interview, and then there is the edit session.
Whoever directed the edit session saw to it that the thrust of the interviewing was followed through to the finished product.
The question is: Who directed the edit session? Gibson or his producer?
Follow-up: Who is the producer? (Will we discover his/her name during the 20/20 show tonight when the entire interview airs?)
If I were the editor, I would beg management to NOT reveal my name at all. That was one of worst hack jobs of an interview I’ve ever seen on broadcast TV.
Just a LIBERAL doing what they alway’s do bending someone’s words to fit their own twisted leftist views.
Everything has to fit into a nice neat box for them with a convienent label.
It’s why SARAH PALIN is so frustrating to them. She does so many things with excellence and intelligence they can’t label her.
We can’t call her a feminist she’s a Republican who is Attractive and smart.
Same as they would do if allowed to interpret the Constituition.
They well not see the words of our brilliant founders, only how to bend+ twist them into the words of MARX or STALIN. Case in point Hillaries:
I will take things away from you for the greater good” straight from the Commuinist Manifesto. It’s what she TRUELY thinks our TAX code and laws are for redistibution of wealth.
This is not what our founders intended and why we can’t give OBAMA the choice of the next Justices to the Supreme Court.
He would nominate complete LIEBERAL lunatics bent on re shaping the Consittution to fit their world views. That’s not what it’s for liberals.
The constitution say you are given those rights by GOD and the constitution is simply eneumerating them. One reason I can’t vote anything but for John McCain/Palin.
Let me finish that sentence for you, "...used food."
"...biologically depleted food."
Let me finish that sentence for you, "...used food."
"...biologically depleted food."
Technically more precise, but Gibson doesn’t rate that much precision (as it obviously isn’t something he values enough to bother with himself).
Charlie Gibson: "What did you mean when you said: ' . . . one can say that I am a liar'?"
SP: "I'm not sure if that's an exact quote."
GB: "Exact words."
The quote was provided to Gibson by a reliable source, faxed from a Kinko’s in Kileen, Texas.
> Technically more precise, but Gibson doesn’t rate that
> much precision (as it obviously isn’t something he values
> enough to bother with himself).
Well said, and very precise!!
:)
Next time you have a have a question for Gov. Palin about the Bush Doctrine why don't you explain what “you” originally thought the Bush Doctrine was and not what “you” said it was last night in “your” condescending correction to Palin’s answer!
In the interview last night Charlie Gibson had this exchange with Gov. Palin:
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
The following is what Charlie Gibson has said in the past what the Bush doctrine is ... It is the same as Gov. Palin answered last night!
September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: The president in his speech last night, very forceful. Four out of five Americans watched it. Everybody gathered around the television set last night. The president issued a series of demands to the Taliban, already rejected. We'll get to that in a moment. He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.
September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: Senator Daschle, let me start with you. People were looking for a Bush Doctrine. They may have found it when he said the war on terror will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped or defeated. That's pretty broad. Broader than you expected?
Charlie Gibson tried to trap Gov. Palin with this interview question. As you can see from the qoutes above Gibson believes the Bush Doctrin is exactly the same as how Palin Answered!
Got you Gibson!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.