Moonsigns  |  BandGuide  |  Blogs  |  Adult
Boston  |  Portland  |  Providence
 

Lipstick-gate: Balance vs. truth

Lipstick-gate is currently the top item on Google News. But if you look for the full quote that triggered it, you won't get it from Fox's latest write-up, or the Times's,  or the Wall Street Journal's, or numerous others.

This is a shame, because the quote in question makes it abundantly clear that Barack Obama did not, in fact, liken Sarah Palin to a pig. Here's how the Times reported the quote in question earlier today:

“John McCain says he’s about change, too — except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics,” Mr. Obama told his supporters here [in Lebanon, Virginia]. “That’s just calling the same thing something different.”

With a laugh, he added: “You can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change; it’s still going to stink after eight years.”

In the latest sign of the campaign’s heightened intensity, Mr. McCain’s surrogates responded within minutes and called on Mr. Obama to apologize to Gov. Sarah Palin for the lipstick remark. But to those in the audience, it was clear that Mr. Obama was employing an age-old phrase — lipstick on a pig — and referring to Mr. McCain’s policies. He had not yet mentioned Ms. Palin at that point of his speech [emph. added].

Given the absurd traction this story is getting, it's absolutely imperative that every news outlet covering it give readers/viewers/listeners the fullest possible account of what Obama actually said.

The alternative, apparently, is reporting the Obama camp's spin and then reporting the McCain camp's spin. This method is "balanced." Problem is, in this particular case, Obama is right and McCain is wrong.

For God's sake, the reporters covering this story don't even need to use those words. They just need to relate what actually happened yesterday.

P.S.--For those who'd like to watch Obama's comments, here they are. Also, here's McCain using the same phrase in reference to Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan. 

Also, in reference to commenter Oldspice: a case could be made that, in this particular case, the word "lipstick" referred to Palin--in Obama's mind, in the audience's, or both. But "pig"? How, given what Obama is talking about here, can that be considered Palin-centric at all? Especially given that politicians were using the expression long before Palin talked lipstick at last week's RNC?

  • oldspice said:

    Please.

    He most certainly was directing the comment to Palin. The audience obviously got the joke. Obama was being too cute by half - just as he was when he flipped Clinton off after the ABC debate - again he proves himself unfit.

    September 10, 2008 4:24 PM
  • Adam Reilly said:

    Oldspice, you've offered an assertion with no evidence. "Most certainly" based on... what, exactly?

    September 10, 2008 4:49 PM
  • gordon marshall said:

    I think the sensitivity goes back to women's fear of being "fat" and developing an eating disorder.  I don't think Obama meant to give Palin an eating disorder; but there we go again--the whole nebulous world of feminine psycho-politics that, nice guy or not, he will have to treat gingerly.

    September 10, 2008 5:44 PM
  • gordon marshall said:

    I actually looked at the "lipstick video" and saw that Obama was covering his face when he said it.  It was patent and evident that this was a line his handlers has coerced (cajoled?) him into saying.  His frown afterward demonstrated that he knew there was no humor in.  In the final analysis, I'm sure he regretted it.  Though at the same time he was probably persuaded, accurately or not, that this was an effective campaign tactic, necessary or not.

    September 12, 2008 2:53 AM
  • gordon marshall said:

    On the Bill O'Reilly Obama interview, I noticed that both of them embraced the American dream, recasting the sarcastic use of the expression "only in America" Giuliani had given it.  How does Giuliani get away with mocking the American dream? Isn't suggesting that Obama is--well, I'll say it.  That black guy that got his way into the presidency--isn't that more abominable than mocking McCain for choosing an underqualified  VP candidate?

    September 12, 2008 3:46 AM
  • joe blow said:

    who gives a shit, who gives a fuck?  vote 3rd party enough of these liars and criminals

    September 12, 2008 8:04 AM
  • gordon marshall said:

    I don't think Darth Vadar will get you for voting 3rd party.  It's a safe bet.

    September 12, 2008 12:17 PM

Leave a Comment


(required)  
(optional)
(required)  
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Adam Reilly's daily look at the news and how it's created.
SUBSCRIBE
Archive






Saturday, September 20, 2008  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
thePhoenix.com:
Phoenix Media/Communications Group:
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
Copyright © 2008 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group