The Sarah Palin Phenomenon Is Doomed
This column was written by MarketWatch's Jon Friedman.
The Sarah Palin Phenomenon is doomed.
But it's not because of her lack of foreign policy experience or her deer-in-the-headlights look during part of her interview last week with ABC's Charles Gibson.
The primary reason why the Palin bubble will burst is that the media will decide that they are bored with her. They'll need to move to shine a light on a fresh issue or individual.
This is how the world works in the age of 24/7 news cycles. Whether the subject is Britney Spears, Michael Jordan or Sarah Palin, we inevitably raise stars to mythic levels, out of all reasonable proportions. Then we knock them down. (Look out, Michael Phelps. Your time is coming, too.)
It isn't a case of quixotic behavior by reporters and editors. Internet sites, blogs and cable news operations all thrive on presenting fresh headlines and updated story angles as often as possible so readers think we're on top of things. The news world moves at warp speed.
Palin's story is especially captivating because she emerged as an overnight sensation. The governor of Alaska was virtually unknown on the national scene before Sen. John McCain tapped her to be his running mate. Amid the media crush accompanying her rise, it now seems as if Palin has been around forever.
For as long as she has been in the public eye, people have been skeptical about her qualifications, but the allure of her beginner's pluck catapulted Palin to the covers of magazines ranging from Time to People.
The interview with Gibson may be remembered as the first brick being pulled out of the wall. The reviews weren't favorable from the media in the segments when Gibson asked Palin questions about foreign policy.
For instance, the New York Times called the exchange "strained." The Washington Post-owned Slate went so far as to say that "The ABC News anchor flummoxes the GOP amateur."
I'll be interested to see how Palin -- not to mention McCain and the Republican campaign machine -- reacts when the media's disillusionment sets in for real. Their actions may determine the course of the 2008 race.
If they handle the media's about-face with aplomb, her chances of looking, well, vice-presidential will be enhanced. But if Palin's handlers blow it out of proportion and show a strain, their behavior will reflect negatively on her.
Gibson, as dignified a newsperson as America has now, treated Palin fairly and didn't resort to hectoring her with "gotcha" questions, either.
Palin's supporters may be chagrined that their candidate didn't sound more self-assured or expert when she discussed Alaska's relationship to Russia. But Gibson didn't try to trip her up. He pretty much asked the kinds of questions I would have put to Palin as well.
Gibson treated her with the respect befitting a vice presidential candidate. ABC, while discussing the interview Friday on "Good Morning America" unleashed political correspondent Jake Tapper to assess the "truthiness" of Palin's remarks on the ABC show.
The television networks appear to be treating Palin carefully, trying hard not to seem sexist or liberal or come across as intellectual, big-city bullies.
When ABC noted that Tapper had found a few holes in Palin's comments (though nothing earth shattering), the network took pains to add that it, too, would be dissecting the statements of Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee.
Specifically, Palin seemed to have little idea about the Bush Doctrine, in which the U.S must spread democracy around the world to halt terrorist acts. When Gibson put it to her and asked if she agreed with the doctrine, she answered, "In what respect, Charlie?"
Some analysts have suggested that Gibson knew more about the Bush Doctrine than the vice-presidential candidate.
"She sidestepped questions on whether she had the national security credentials needed to be commander-in-chef," the Associated Press noted.
Since we're all clear on the nuances of the Bush Doctrine, we can move on to the Fickle Media Doctrine.
Now that we've built you up, it's about time for us to knock you down.
Can Sarah Palin withstand the body blows that are being inflicted by the national media?
The media aren't the bad guys in the Palin discussion. It's easy to accuse us of acting like sexists or big-city egomaniacs. Let's be real, though. McCain selected Palin for exactly those reasons - because she is a woman from a little-known state, who can take some of the heat off McCain and behave like an attack dog against Barack Obama. So far, the Republicans' plan has worked to perfection, as Palin has dominated the political discourse over the past few weeks. Now we'll see if she has the right stuff to go the distance.
By Jon Friedman
MarketWatch The Sarah Palin Phenomenon is doomed.
But it's not because of her lack of foreign policy experience or her deer-in-the-headlights look during part of her interview last week with ABC's Charles Gibson.
The primary reason why the Palin bubble will burst is that the media will decide that they are bored with her. They'll need to move to shine a light on a fresh issue or individual.
This is how the world works in the age of 24/7 news cycles. Whether the subject is Britney Spears, Michael Jordan or Sarah Palin, we inevitably raise stars to mythic levels, out of all reasonable proportions. Then we knock them down. (Look out, Michael Phelps. Your time is coming, too.)
It isn't a case of quixotic behavior by reporters and editors. Internet sites, blogs and cable news operations all thrive on presenting fresh headlines and updated story angles as often as possible so readers think we're on top of things. The news world moves at warp speed.
Palin's story is especially captivating because she emerged as an overnight sensation. The governor of Alaska was virtually unknown on the national scene before Sen. John McCain tapped her to be his running mate. Amid the media crush accompanying her rise, it now seems as if Palin has been around forever.
For as long as she has been in the public eye, people have been skeptical about her qualifications, but the allure of her beginner's pluck catapulted Palin to the covers of magazines ranging from Time to People.
The interview with Gibson may be remembered as the first brick being pulled out of the wall. The reviews weren't favorable from the media in the segments when Gibson asked Palin questions about foreign policy.
For instance, the New York Times called the exchange "strained." The Washington Post-owned Slate went so far as to say that "The ABC News anchor flummoxes the GOP amateur."
I'll be interested to see how Palin -- not to mention McCain and the Republican campaign machine -- reacts when the media's disillusionment sets in for real. Their actions may determine the course of the 2008 race.
If they handle the media's about-face with aplomb, her chances of looking, well, vice-presidential will be enhanced. But if Palin's handlers blow it out of proportion and show a strain, their behavior will reflect negatively on her.
Gibson, as dignified a newsperson as America has now, treated Palin fairly and didn't resort to hectoring her with "gotcha" questions, either.
Palin's supporters may be chagrined that their candidate didn't sound more self-assured or expert when she discussed Alaska's relationship to Russia. But Gibson didn't try to trip her up. He pretty much asked the kinds of questions I would have put to Palin as well.
Gibson treated her with the respect befitting a vice presidential candidate. ABC, while discussing the interview Friday on "Good Morning America" unleashed political correspondent Jake Tapper to assess the "truthiness" of Palin's remarks on the ABC show.
The television networks appear to be treating Palin carefully, trying hard not to seem sexist or liberal or come across as intellectual, big-city bullies.
When ABC noted that Tapper had found a few holes in Palin's comments (though nothing earth shattering), the network took pains to add that it, too, would be dissecting the statements of Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee.
Specifically, Palin seemed to have little idea about the Bush Doctrine, in which the U.S must spread democracy around the world to halt terrorist acts. When Gibson put it to her and asked if she agreed with the doctrine, she answered, "In what respect, Charlie?"
Some analysts have suggested that Gibson knew more about the Bush Doctrine than the vice-presidential candidate.
"She sidestepped questions on whether she had the national security credentials needed to be commander-in-chef," the Associated Press noted.
Since we're all clear on the nuances of the Bush Doctrine, we can move on to the Fickle Media Doctrine.
Now that we've built you up, it's about time for us to knock you down.
Can Sarah Palin withstand the body blows that are being inflicted by the national media?
The media aren't the bad guys in the Palin discussion. It's easy to accuse us of acting like sexists or big-city egomaniacs. Let's be real, though. McCain selected Palin for exactly those reasons - because she is a woman from a little-known state, who can take some of the heat off McCain and behave like an attack dog against Barack Obama. So far, the Republicans' plan has worked to perfection, as Palin has dominated the political discourse over the past few weeks. Now we'll see if she has the right stuff to go the distance.
By Jon Friedman
Popular on MoneyWatch
- When it comes to vacations, the U.S. stinks 71 Comments
- Snapple co-founder Leonard Marsh dies at 80
- Reverse cell phone lookup service is free and simple
- TGI Fridays nailed for doctoring booze
- Amy's Baking Company could face legal 'nightmare'
- How Bernanke's testimony affects investors
- My company is ending OT pay, but not OT work
- Help! My boss is promoting the wrong person
And by the way, fine by me if Obama voted 100% with abortionists. He has as much right to his religious opinion as anyone else.
Because all they have to do is to compete against the democrats?