Re Palin: please remember in those interviews she was given the questions ahead of time

[featherman]

and her team of (Bush) writers prepared her answers for her.

And she had note cards on hand with the answers.

And she still flubbed up with gibberish responses here and there.

[ingac70]

1. All the more reason to be excited...

about watching her fall flat on her face at the debate with Biden.

[WheelWalker]

29. Along the watch tower, said the Joker to the Thief.

Two riders are approaching. There will soon be relief

[alsame]

2. I think she will be a complete disaster - she is getting worse

over time (Couric interview was more pathetic than Gibson interview). Add the pressure of a nationally televised debate and having to appear with Biden and she will fold like a cheap suit.

[renate]

3. was she really? oh my goodness!

I'd have thought that Couric and Gibson would have had to say so as a basic tenet of journalism. (I wouldn't have expected Fox to have the same requirement, and I'm not being snarky.)

[ORDem]

4. Do you have evidence that she was given the answers? Link please. But, ...

it's true, she did refer to notes in her lap several times during the interview. She is as lightweight as they come. Way out of her league. Even the low expectations are not going to help her when she starts blathering incoherently on stage. If she wasn't such a mean-mouthed asshole I'd almost feel sorry for her. It's not going to be pretty.

:dem:

[featherman]

9. See below... easily Googled

[featherman]

10. Addendum: "discussions about possible questions" with citation

It's my understanding that these political interviews are staged theater unlike open press conferences. It seems naive to believe otherwise. Googling it, this comment kind of stands out but is not a blatant admission:

"Gibson wasn't available for comment Monday, but Banner said there were no preconditions to the Palin interview.

"There are no restrictions. All questions are on the table," he said Monday. "But we haven't had those discussions" about possible questions yet."


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i425366f6874393a70d2aa835e1dd76e3

Question for those who believe these interviews are spontaneous: What does "discussions about possible questions" mean in this context unless it is that the two staffs are discussing and agreeing about which questions will be asked?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

11. "just remembered from an article"

I.e., zilch.

[featherman]

12. See above

[A-Schwarzenegger]

15. Even the pre-article says NOTHING about her being given the questions. I.E.: Zilch.

However, continue making things up. It's fun.

[featherman]

17. Now you're being silly... What does "discussions about questions" mean then?

Her staff and the ABC staff negotiated the possible questions and came to an agreement before the interview. Did her staff just "forget" which questions were going to be asked?

What are you talking about?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

19. You said, with zero proof: "she was given the questions ahead of time"

Admitting you were wrong won't kill you. Honest.

[featherman]

20. "She" being her staff, obviously. The staff that prepares the candidate for these

staged events. That's what these well-paid, high powered professional staffs are for. I never meant to imply that Palin herself was handed some kind of a crib sheet. No particular point to that.

In the real world all this stuff is handled at the staff level. The questions are known, the answers are written up by the writers, and the candidate then learns the answers, perhaps given a crash course with some background context by handlers. Then they cross their fingers and hope for the best.

Whatever spontaneity comes about may just result from candidate having to prepare "on message" answers to 20 or 30 possible questions while only 10 or 15 are actually asked and the candidate may not know the actual order in which they are asked.

I'm not wrong about this so no apology necessary.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

24. BZZZZZT!

From the article:
"'There are no restrictions. All questions are on the table,' (World News" executive producer Jon Banner) said Monday. 'But we haven't had those discussions' about possible questions yet.' (ABC News President) Westin said there were no ‘extensive' negotiations between the campaign and ABC News over the interview and no substantive discussions about the content."

From you:
"Her staff and the ABC staff negotiated the possible questions and came to an agreement before the interview."

Is that claim from an article other than the one you cited?
Because that's not in the article you cited.

To wrap up:
No discussions about possible questions.
No substantive discussions about content.
No agreement before the interview about questions.
Interview itself makes clear Palin is clueless about questions.
Aftermath: no evidence or credible claim that she was given questions beforehand.
Your conclusion: She was given questions beforehand.

:* :hi:

[sammytko]

13. That is why I do not feel sorry for her - she is a meany - nt

[Vinca]

5. You've got to be kidding. She performed that badly WITH the questions? nt

[mamalone]

6. Are you sure about this?

Because I had heard that she was not given the questions beforehand.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

7. Let's see if we can get a CITATION/SOURCE/ANYTHING on this claim this time.

[featherman]

14. See addendum above

[A-Schwarzenegger]

16. See Zilch above.

[JackBeck]

8. Is she gonna write the answers on the palm of her hand for Thursday?

[Cleita]

18. As the cynic that I am, whose to say she won't have the

questions ahead of time? Remember this is the party whose motto is "the ends justifies the means". Remember that Gwen Ifill is a Republican and BFF of Condoleezza Rice. Whether she will leak tha actual questions, I don't think so, but I think they can be gotten some way by a political party that has been known to stoop lower and lower to gain its means.

[goclark]

32. Agree ~ Ifill would fold for a new pair of Shoes while

shopping with her BFF.

[vaberella]

21. I heard about that..which makes her story even that more tragic. n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

22. Where did you hear about it, this thread?

[vaberella]

23. Nope. It was in another thread discussing the video. I can search for it. But I didn't save it.

n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

25. If there's a citation that she was given the questions beforehand, I'd love to see it.

[vaberella]

28. I can't find it. Since it was dated. But you're right..I remember it was hearsay.

I don't remember there beingi documented information that she was actually given the questions.

Sorry I couldn't find the link of the thread. It had a screen shot of Palin looking down at her lap, as though to say that she was looking at the answers/questions before she answered. Then it went on about how she must have been given the questions in advance.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

31. Thanks for lookin', vaberella!

:hi:

[rvablue]

26. While we might not always like the product of network news

I can assure you 100% that neither Charlie Gibson nor Katie Couric gave the campaign the questions in advance.
You may sense bias here and there, but this is just journalist ethics 101 and there is no way any of the network anchors would stoop this low.

[Inuca]

27. I agree, it's BS n/t

[gordianot]

30. One I have not heard or read.

Do you have a source or link? I would like to quote it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

33. LOFL. 7 RECS for a completely unsubstantiated claim.

:* :* :* :* :* :* :*

Bring back that ratings system that I hated so much!