 |
Palin: Freedom of the press is a ‘privilege’ that media ‘abuse’ |
 |
(originally published at MWC News)
In a post-debate interview with Fox News’ chief political correspondent Carl Cameron, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin provided some of the answers that seemed to elude her in her past interview with Katie Couric.
Cameron told her that some observers, pleased with her debate performance, asked, “Where was this Sarah Palin in the interview with Katie Couric?”
“OK, I’ll tell you honestly,” Palin said, “the Sarah Palin in those interviews is a little bit annoyed because it’s like, man, no matter what you say, you’re going to get clobbered. If you choose to answer a question, you are going to get clobbered on the answer. If you choose to try and pivot and go on to another subject that you believe that Americans want to hear about, you get clobbered for that, too.”
Palin added, “In those Katie Couric interviews I did feel that there were a lot of things that she was missing in terms of an opportunity to ask what a vice presidential candidate stands for — what the values are represented in our ticket. I wanted to talk about Barack Obama increasing taxes, which would lead to killing jobs, wanted to talk about his proposal to increase government spending by another trillion dollars. Some of his comments that he has made about the war that I think may, in my world, disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander in chief. … I wanted to talk about things like that. So, I guess I have to apologize about being a little annoyed, but that is also an indication of being outside that Washington elite, outside of the media elite, also, and just wanted to talk to Americans without the filter and let them know what we stand for.”
“So, at the risk of annoying you,” said Cameron, “when you are asked, ‘What do you read, which papers and magazines?’ You didn’t answer it. Or, you said, ‘I have all kinds of resources.’”
“Right, right, right,” said Palin.
“Well, what do you read?” asked Cameron.
“I read the same things that other people across the country read, including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and The Economist and some of these publications that we’ve recently even been interviewed through up there in Alaska. Because of everything that we’re doing with oil and gas, a lot of the investment publications, especially, are interviewing us, asking us how we are being so successful up there in contributing to our nation’s step towards energy independence…
“My response to her, I guess it was kind of flippant. But, I was sort of taken aback, like, the suggestion was, ‘You’re way up there in a far away place in Alaska, do you know that there are publications in the rest of the world that are read by many?’ And I was taken aback by that because, I don’t know, the suggestion just was a little bit of perhaps we’re not in tune with the rest of the world.”
Cameron then asked another Couric question that Palin didn’t answer: about Supreme Court decisions that she disagrees with other than Roe v Wade. “As a conservative, there are some in the Republican Party who would expect a vice presidential nominee to understand judicial conservatives and to have something that they might object to,” Cameron said.
“And that’s fair, right, and on that one, true, I shouldn’t have been so flippant and just sort of brushed aside that,” Palin said, “because it was an important question and I should have answered it, and yeah, I can cite a lot of cases that I absolutely disagree with the Supreme Court on.”
She elaborated: “A recent one, Kennedy v Louisiana, where the Supreme Court will tell a state that they can’t impose the death penalty even on the heinous crimes of repeat child rapists, that a state … its rights were taken away by the Supreme Court, and we would not be able to decide for ourselves whether the death penalty in a case like that could be implemented or not. That one, I’m certainly not a supporter of that decision.”
Palin mentioned the Kelo case, also with the eminent domain — “that affects me as governor. It affected me as a mayor, also. Property rights are so precious in this nation and for the Supreme Court to have sided with government instead of the people, the property owners on that — that was frustrating. Another one … personally affecting me also, the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The siding with the oil companies, they decimated Alaska’s coastline and much of our fisheries and much of our coastal communities’ livelihoods of people who live there, and they sided with Exxon on the punishment — the punitive damage that was to be awarded, Exxon won on that one, and in a sense, that was frustrating.”
Palin, asked about her relationship with the media, said, “What I need to do is commit to not be so annoyed and impatient with mainstream media. And I will make that commitment because I do understand that that is how I speak to the American people. In a position like this, I speak to you and through you, and that way, that message is received by American people. So, I apologize for the the, I guess, flippant response that I gave through that interview on a couple of questions.
“But I would ask also, then, that the media tries a little bit harder also,” Palin went on. “And that this is a two-way street, that there is fairness, just objectivity and fairness and truth. That’s all Americans ask for.”
“Objectivity?” Cameron asked. “Fairness?”
“As we send our young men and women overseas in a war zone to fight for democracy and freedoms, including freedom of the press, we’ve really got to have a mutually beneficial relationship here with those fighting the freedom of the press, and then the press, though not taking advantage and exploiting a situation, perhaps they would want to capture and abuse the privilege. We just want truth, we want fairness, we want balance.”
It is not a big deal. Freedom of speech is a privilage for us, we have to fight for it against other nations because they ar ejelous of it. She is not threatening to take it away. Must we take everything out of context!?
Freedom of speech is not a privilege for us, it is a right. And if you truly believe the United States are currently fighting in any war to safeguard that right against foreign enemies, you are far too gullible.
The only fighting I’ve seen to protect our rights are at the DNC/RNC, and those fights are against the men and women in uniform. (Look up “Free Speech Zone”)
Do you really think Palin would come out and say that she is planning on removing our 1st Amendment rights? Of course not! It may be out of context, but it’s the only information we have to go on.
Freedom of the press is not a privilege, correct. I don’t support Palin at all — and as she’s proven to be a sloppy speaker and was probably stumbling over her words–, I think she means that reporters are privileged to have the job they do (play the role in society they do) and should be fair and unbiased in the way they deliver it as a duty to their readers.
What an IDIOT. Freedom of the press isn’t a privilege; it’s a Constitutional right. It’s in the First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
If Palin doesn’t know that it’s a Constitutional right–which a student in a seventh-grade civics class would know–then I don’t trust her in a position of power, plain and simple. At worst she’s demonstrating an indifference to the very basis for our government; at best she’s woefully, criminally ignorant. I don’t consider either condition to be laudable or desirable.
It’s hilarious that you chose to write up that interview. Forgive her for speaking. Obviously what she means with the word is, regardless of what rights we claim are inherent to man, the exercise of that right in the political sphere is a privilege governments grant. We may say they are wrong not to grant it, right to protect it, but the right to something does not mean the Ability to exercise it. Journalists in this country have the privilege of exercising their right.
You went ahead and grabbed a very sensible statement about journalists being reliable reporters, and proceeded to obscure what she is actually saying by playing into the prejudice that Palin is stupid. Proving her point. That’s bad journalism, however much attention your title gets from stumblers.
Admittedly, your article itself is not strongly prejudicial. It is simply the title and highlighting which invite the slant.
Or maybe I’m just projecting. Apologies.