Posted on 03/06/2016 10:21:34 PM PST by Nachum
MSNBC had an awkward moment while trying to conduct a post-debate interview Sunday night, as reporter Kristen Welker appeared not to know she was live and told a Hillary Clinton aide what she would be asking her during their segment.
She then interrupted the guest, Jen Palmieri, when she heard a delayed prompt from the studio.
Ari Melber threw to Welker to speak with Palmieri, a flack for Hillary Clinton, but Welker was in mid-conversation with Palmieri and was telling her she would ask a question about Flint, Michigan, the site of Sunday night’s debate, because of the water crisis there.
“And I’m going to ask you about Flint,” Welker said.
“Kristen, go ahead, you’re live,” Melber said. “You know, we have Kristen Welker. We’re looking at her. She couldn’t quite hear me before. Can you hear me now? If you can, go ahead.”
Welker appeared to be receiving a delayed signal. Finally, she began the interview.
“So Jen, your initial reaction to tonight’s debate? Very fiery,” Welker said.
“Very fiery. Also very substantive,” Palmieri said. “I think it was probably the most substantive exchange that we’ve had. Also, there were a little bit of fireworks, but I think that it was useful because we think–”
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Clinton wouldn’t know a “hard ball” if it rolled one of her cankles
That’s because her “canckles” are as big and round as a redwood and would prevent her from seeing it.
So now we see how it’s done. Not that we didn’t know already.
My wish would be that a news reporter would Palinize her.
I hope they’re getting plenty of “before” pictures of North Korea while there’s still time. There will be lots of time to get the “after” shots.
The good part is that she will be off balance debating Trump.
It is good to have the vindicating evidence for what we knew all along.
Im dont think it is all that unusual for reporters to cover the subject matter with the person they are interviwing before they go live. Generally the subject is known. I dont see anything sinister here.
The White House under Zero has set up questions all pre approved by the administration.
Trump’s unpredictability will pay off.
That is the way it is done. Not unusual. A reporter wants to interview you what is the first thing you ask?
Unless she’s fed the questions before hand, while he’s not.
Like here.
MSNBC tells them questions in advance and let’s them have teleprompters.
There is no other way to explain Wasserman-Schultz’ mispronunciation of misled.
There won’t be any debates. They’ll find an excuse not to have them.
Fair enough. The difference is when they tell you in advance the interview is about one thing, and once you're live, they ask you something else. They do this to conservatives. To Stalinists, not so much.
This is normally how an interviewee is made comfortable... No real problem here. It is when the media offers the answers then that is where I have a problem with it.
And we MAKE FUN of Russia?
BJ Clinton did the same thing; if he didn’t the reporters would all ask about his girlfriends (during his first term) and Monica (during his second). They orchestrated everything, and with Obama it has been fine-tuned; a teleprompter can’t keep up with random questions. He would actually stop speaking when the teleprompter malfunctioned - the epitome of an empty token.
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.