Fox News has been busy promoting Sarah Palin’s first interview since the Tucson Slaughter. It finally took place last night on Sean Hannity’s show.
I’m not going to waste time analyzing her response to Hannity’s obsequious inquiry because it was, for the most part, either incoherent gibberish or self-indulgent whining. But I do want to comment on the absurdity of this being presented as an interview in the context of journalism.
Ethical journalists do not pay subjects for interviews, particularly subjects in the public service arena. However, Palin was being paid for her appearance on the Hannity show. She is a contracted Fox News contributor. So what we witnessed last night was one Fox News employee interviewing another Fox News employee and pretending that it had news value.
This is just another example of why Fox ought not to be considered a legitimate news network. If Palin wanted to appear on Hannity’s program in her role as a Fox contributor, that would be fine and in accordance with her contract. But to pass this off as a newsmaker interview amounts to nothing less than deception and journalistic malpractice.
Expect more of this sort of charade in the months ahead because at least five prospective GOP presidential candidates are presently on the Fox payroll. Anyone who sees these imitation interviews needs to remember that they are bought and paid for. And that includes other media enterprises who report on what they see on Fox.
“I’m not going to waste time analyzing…”
So, what else is new? Spouting mindless insults does not pass for analysis. This is “just another example” of a website that thinks it has something relevant to say when in reality Don Imus is easier to understand than you are.
You know, if you’re gonna accuse people of spouting mindless insults you might want to try not spouting mindless insults.
By not even bothering to offer a rebuttal to anything I wrote you reveal yourself to be an intellectual coward/midget. Would it really be so hard to to attempt to make a substantive argument for whatever it is you believe? And if you think this web site has nothing relevant to say, what does that say about you who spends so much time here?
So Scott, are you disputing the fact that Sarah Palin is a paid Fox News contributor and that this fact was not disclosed in the interview with Hannity? Are you disputing the fact that Palin refuses to interview with any other outlet and then conveniently relies on the “gotcha journalism” or “lamestream media” excuses?
Have you ever listened to ultra-liberal Thomm Harmann on his radio show? At least once per show, usually twice, he civilly debates a conservative, often an ultra right winger. How often does Hannity do that? Beck? Limbaugh? Savage? Larson? Boortz? Gallager? Cunningham?
And Hartmann goes further. He refuses to allow callers to criticize or besmirch those guests once they’re off the air because they’re not available to defend themselves.
Mark,
Your observation is absolutely dead-on! In the interest of full disclosure did Hannity mention this fact to his audience? Without watching it myself, I don’t know, but I would wager he did not.
What Fox is doing to Sarah Bin Palin is called “brand salvaging.” You see examples of this all the time. Nike had to do it with Tiger Woods after he was outed as a serial adulterer. Tylenol had to do it after the poisoning incidents in the early 1980s. BP is still engaged in it now as a result of the oil spill. News Corp has lots of money invested in the former governor, and if she crashes and burns, that investment goes straight down the loo.
That’s a great term: brand salvaging. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. With any luck (and justice) FOX’ll be doing a lot of it from now on.
What’s odd is that the Wall Street Journal, another subsidiary of News Corps, does a very good job of disclosing its relationship to other News Corps entities when it reports on them. They even disclose their relationship when mentioning other news sources. Their editorial page is about a 95% to 5% ratio of conservative to liberal, but I’m finding a decent amount of news reporting to still be pretty fair.
“…intellectual coward/midget…”
That best describes the name-calling and insults that you fully rely on, junior. If somebody is a Fox News contributor, that means they are paid. Common knowledge. You don’t have to put that on the chyron every time. I watched the interview, and the pertinent questions were asked about “blood libel”, the crosshairs graphic, etc. There was some information to be gleaned from that interview, even if it was a softball interview. Let’s hear you proclaim that Larry King’s interviews were all a complete waste, if you want to be consistent.
Larry King’s interviews all WERE a complete waste. He was woefully (and famously) unprepared, and gave huge softball questions, with the only purpose seemingly to ensure a return visit.
And junior, I’d bet dollars to donuts (whatever the eff that actually means) that Palin was given the questions prior to her interview. Had she the courage to let another outlet interview her, that wouldn’t be the case…but then she’d just scream “gotcha journalism” and “they’re out to get me, those lamestreamers!”
I wouldn’t be surprised if she wrote the questions herself. Seriously.
She would probably have those “ghost” written as well!
I’m surprised he is considered a journalist, he doesn’t really do that does he? He is more of political commentator – or is that the same thing these days? I’m not trying to attack anyone here or even be provocative, but he really doesn’t do a great show in my opinion – very hard to watch – and I’m pretty conservative.