More and more we see evidence that the media, in general, is taking Trump's calculated anti-media comments far too seriously, even personal, to the point that all personnel working with or for the President are fair game and can be treated with disrespect. They often fail to treat each such a person according to their stature as an individual. They are not necessarily joined at the hip with Trump and deserve to be treated with courtesy in a non aggressive manner. Who are these inconsiderate reporters? Who are these individuals who shout their aggressive questions from afar for a human being after all. Their mannerism can be likened to a shouting dog owner, who is very unhappy with his pet, for whatever reason.
I selected Kellyanne Conway, to make my point, being the spokesperson for the president, and it seems to me, she is punished by the media for doing her job; the same applies to our press-secretary. Reporters ask her a question, and then when they don't like where the reply is going, they rudely interrupt and become abusive. They no longer wait for the person to finish answering but interject themselves in a brute manner. Like an attorney, she is paid to protect the president and the office of the president of the United States. What is so difficult in understanding this clear mandate any of the people have working in the administration. There are polite ways to conduct an interview, why not use them? Please see one video example below.
Here are a few video examples to make my point.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/08/12/kellyanne-conway-abc-top-black-aide-white-house-west-wing-omarosa-ekr-orig-vstan.cnn/video/playlists/kellyanne-conway/
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/06/19/kellyanne-conway-immigrant-families-separated-at-border-cuomo-sot-cpt.cnn/video/playlists/kellyanne-conway/
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/08/05/kellyanne-conway-face-nation-journalists-not-enemy-sot-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/kellyanne-conway/
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/04/22/kellyanne-conway-dana-bash-spar-husbands-tweets-sotu-long.cnn/video/playlists/kellyanne-conway/
An example of a more civil video interview.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/06/06/kellyanne-conway-newday-intv-sot.cnn/video/playlists/kellyanne-conway/
When somebody asks a question to which the questioner already knows the answer, what is the purpose? You are right, it is often to publicly embarrass the person questioned. What does this say about the questioner? The questioner (a reporter, in this case, whose job it is to elicit information) is not trying to gain newsworthy information, but is trying to make a negative point.
I found an article which deals with an interview of Walter Cronkite in the '60s, an Icon in the world of reporting. Ref. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/interviews/cronkite.html
The following is quoted from the article referenced above.
Back in the '60s Walter Cronkite wrote, "The Nixon administration related to the press was based on a simple formula. If you could bring down the press's credibility, it might improve his credibility."
.
The interviewer then asked, " What was that like ... when you heard the attack from the Nixon administration?" Cronkite answered as follows.
"Oh, I don't know. I don't think that it sent any of us crying out of the room exactly. We expected it. Very shortly after he began to attack the press, we understood that that was a certain attitude that the man had towards the press, The fact that he would occasionally make us the target, make me the target was not bothersome. That's the way he is going to react to almost anything we do. We're not going to satisfy him, and that wasn't our job to satisfy him.
That's one of the things that must be kept in mind, that we have no obligation to our subjects, particularly political subjects, who are going to use whatever they can get hold of to further their own cause of getting re-elected. No matter what their job, whether you as a president being re-elected or a congressman or a city councilman, they all work on the same principle. The principle is that if they feel they're in any way being offended by the press and embarrassed by the press, they're going to retort, come back at you. That's their defense mode. So we live that way. Yeah, that's the business."
The article goes on making reference to a confrontation between Nixon and Dan Rather, during which Nixon asked Rather, "Are you running for office?" Cronkite jumped right in.
"Yeah, sure. And Rather answers back: "No. Are you?" Yeah. That is a little bit sharper than most television journalists would play a politician, an officeholder. I think that that was a little disrespectful. He's the president of the United States. ... That hit me the wrong way at that moment. ... I felt that Rather was lowering himself in doing that, in trying to bandy around with the president of the United States. It seemed a little out of step."
Unfortunately, today the president of the United States is fair game to be publicly embarrassed and insulted by just about anyone, be it a biased or rude reporter, commentator, or a celebrity of some kind. What these individuals, doing so, do not realize that if we at home do not respect the office of the president of the United States, how can other nations do any different? In fairness, our current president invites this kind of behavior by using the Twitter platform and political rallies to make unpresidential comments about others. However, two wrongs do not make a right. When somebody rolls in the mud, it does not mean one has to join in; whoever does so only lowers himself/herself.
It is very sad that civility in the public arena appears to be dead, at least in our country; it's return is very doubtful.
No comments:
Post a Comment