"In an hour long appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" Thursday (actually taped weeks earlier), Elizabeth Edwards did not name Hunter once, and neither did the host-it was a condition of the interview. The Associated Press was unable to speak to Edwards directly because of her condition that nowhere in the article could Hunter's name appear. Instead, Edwards' publishers relayed her answers to the AP.
Where do I begin! The fact that Oprah agreed to the conditions? Nah, she and her ilk will agree to just about anything to get an interview, and some shows I am quite sure pay cash for them. Did she disclose the fact that there were conditions? I didn't see it, but she certainly should have. The AP "was unable to speak directly"...so the "publishers relayed her answers"? What's that all about? You can't ask questions of a piece of paper. That's why "journalism" based on news releases is so sleazy. It's why TV stations should not use videotaped statements provided by campaigns and companies...you can't ask questions. At the very least..disclose the source! I suppose that's what the AP is doing, disclosing the bizarre conditions behind the information in the story. Better than nothing.
[Disclosure: Once, a political guest found himself in a messy divorce situation days before a scheduled appearance on FTR. The handler who set up the interview asked me to agree not to ask about it. I did, because that wasn't the reason the person was being invited. It also was a call-in show that night and I was sure a caller would ask about it for me. They didn't, and I regret agreeing to the condition to this day.]
[UPDATE: "No question is off limits" intoned Oprah dramatically at the very start of the set up for the Edwards interview. Who's lying? AP or Oprah?]
[UPDATE: Within the interview, Oprah discloses the condition and Edwards tells her why she required it. Guess there was some heavy parsing going on there...no questions were off limits, but using the name of Rielle Hunter was.]
No comments:
Post a Comment