What I hate about US News...
Jan. 22nd, 2012 10:14 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
daveonNo, as you suspected, it's not about them being left wing. It's that they're bad at their job(*). The question, that arguably, won Newt Gingrinch won the SC primary is a classic example. It was a closed question.
Young wannabe sales people are taught about closed questions on day 1, so, I believe are journalists. They're questions which elicit a Yes or No answer. Unless you want to steer a person towards a certain decision, you avoid these. You certainly don't open a debate with them. Here's some alternative formulations that would have worked:
- Mr Speaker - Given your record of statements regarding the sanctity of marriage, and your opposition to Gay marriage as under mining the fabric of American Society, given revelations made by your ex-wife that you wanted an 'open marriage', how do you address charges of hypocrisy?
- Mr Speaker - given your marital history, recent allegations from your former wife, and your ethics problems, how would assure the American people that your character is suitable to hold high office.
There's lots of other formulations which wouldn't have soft balled him like that.
Another example - today on Meet the Press, David Gregory let Newt deal with a soft ball on his roll at Fannie Mae with a "I was just a strategic advisor", and left it up to Chris Flamming Christie to point out the obvious follow up. "I'm sorry Mr Speaker, that's the oldest Washington dodge in the book - you are saying you took $1m in fees for consulting on one paper and NOTHING else?"
I keep hearing Jeremy Paxman saying "oh come on Minister" at the end of that.
(*) - I am prepared to accept that there is a conspiracy going on that they want Gingrinch to stay in for a long time because it's good for business.
Young wannabe sales people are taught about closed questions on day 1, so, I believe are journalists. They're questions which elicit a Yes or No answer. Unless you want to steer a person towards a certain decision, you avoid these. You certainly don't open a debate with them. Here's some alternative formulations that would have worked:
- Mr Speaker - Given your record of statements regarding the sanctity of marriage, and your opposition to Gay marriage as under mining the fabric of American Society, given revelations made by your ex-wife that you wanted an 'open marriage', how do you address charges of hypocrisy?
- Mr Speaker - given your marital history, recent allegations from your former wife, and your ethics problems, how would assure the American people that your character is suitable to hold high office.
There's lots of other formulations which wouldn't have soft balled him like that.
Another example - today on Meet the Press, David Gregory let Newt deal with a soft ball on his roll at Fannie Mae with a "I was just a strategic advisor", and left it up to Chris Flamming Christie to point out the obvious follow up. "I'm sorry Mr Speaker, that's the oldest Washington dodge in the book - you are saying you took $1m in fees for consulting on one paper and NOTHING else?"
I keep hearing Jeremy Paxman saying "oh come on Minister" at the end of that.
(*) - I am prepared to accept that there is a conspiracy going on that they want Gingrinch to stay in for a long time because it's good for business.
