Elliott (Who should know better by the way.) does not give the Professor much credit for tackling this story:
"The fact that a journalism professor produced this article is frankly embarrassing for Northern Kentucky University."
Nor does he appear to have really read Scharlott's research paper with the kind of critical eye one would expect from an impartial journalist.
However the point that the Professor was making in his paper is that the press did not do their due diligence when it came to this story, and simply stuck their heads in the sand hoping that it would all go away. It appears that some are hoping for the same outcome this time as well.
So let's see if the Professor's explanation of the "Spiral of Silence" killing this story last time, holds true again THIS time.
I think for those of us who really want this story to finally receive the attention that it deserves our choices are clear. If WE continue to spread this to as many media outlets as possible, and provide commentary and page views for blogs and news websites willing to address this paper, we might just be able to twist the arm of the MSM hard enough to force them to pay attention this time around.
Even if all they want to do is refute the Professor's findings, in order to do so they would have to re-examine the evidence. And after all, isn't THAT really all that we have been asking them to do for these last three years?
Update: Sullivan notices the same thing that all of us noticed:
Elliott does not criticize the paper; he offers no thoughts on the specifics; he has no opinion on the media's role. He just asserts that this is an absurd request, even though Palin is actually on record saying she has already released a birth certificate for Trig (which she hasn't).
And so Elliott, far from rebutting the theory of press laziness and incuriosity in the paper, actually adds one more tidbit of confirmation.
So I guess the question is, will other journalists treat this paper with the same obvious disdain that Eilliott did, or are there any REAL journalists left?
Excellent. I hope MSNBC, CNN, Huffington Post, The Daily Beast, USA Today, etc. all do a story on Professor Scharlott's paper and whether or not it is an embarrassment.
ReplyDeleteThe more people that read it, the better. If it starts a national conversation about the mystery that is Sarah Palin's actions in early 2008, the better.
I hate Salon - unsubscribed from them 10 years ago--and quit reading there ever since Camille Paglia was hired by Joan Walsh to write praise of Palin and other ridiculous things.
ReplyDeleteAll of this just serves to prove the good Professor's point. It was declared "hands off" and the media complied. They are still complying. I seem to remember something similar with John Edwards, that lots of people in the media knew about his affair, but they didn't write anything about it until the National Enquirer blew the story wide open.
ReplyDeleteFrom a purely academic standpoint, it's an interesting case for a journalism professor regardless of where a person stands on the issue of Trig's birth story.
I LOVE that even if the article seems unflattering, the entire paper is there for anyone to see and Salon isn't exactly a fringe publication. That the article is being written at all just brings more attention to the situation and validates the fact that an inquiry is being made. Further, it's no surprise that the media is going to push back on their negligence and this is just the beginning volley, since they have to cover their asses for being such poor excuses for 'journalists' and that it took a person in academia to call them out. More power to the Professor!
ReplyDelete"Embarrassing to Northern Kentucky University."
ReplyDeleteNowhere nears as embarrassing to your state as Mitch McConnell.
“Non-Press Release” of the Anchorage Police Regarding Todd Palin’s Love Child
ReplyDeleteThe anticipation is overwhelming. We have been waiting since March 25, 2011 for the Anchorage Police Department to clarify the truth of the allegations of the National Enquirer that Todd Palin has a love child. Of course we would expect the Anchorage Police Department to shed some light on the story printed by the National Enquirer. When the allegations of a sexual relationship between Todd Palin and Shailey Tripp surfaced, we only had to wait four days for an explanation from the APD. We didn’t hear a denial from Sarah of that “relationship” until Jan. 28th, which was seven days after the story broke, and three days after the APD issued their “Press Release.”
It’s now been over 15 days since the story broke regarding the “Love Child” and we haven’t been graced with a Press Release asserting the “lack of evidence” connecting Todd Palin and any “love child” in Alaska.
http://malialitman.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/non-press-release-of-the-anchorage-police-regarding-todd-palins-love-child/
I am not as optimistic as you are.
ReplyDeleteMy impression is that they barely read the paper and will just dismiss it and shame the professor for ever daring to bring this up.
It is like they are afraid to dirty their eyes by reading it. So I doubt they will re-examine the facts at all.
Read the comments from Salon, you will see people bring up the Palin stated "facts" as rebuttal, when if they read the paper they will find that these could not be real evidence at all. Others will equate this with Obama birther story, ie, if Obama story is false, this one must be false, too.
It is hopeless.
A little off topic.
ReplyDeleteGeoffrey Dunn's book is set to be released on May 10th. I just checked at amazon and saw the tags that people are offering up for the book.
So far "grifter" "sociopath" and "liar" are in the lead. lol.
So here's hoping that Dunn's book will be a smashing success and help validate Prof. Scharlott's paper. Maybe then, the MSM will take another look.
Yippee... more press!
ReplyDeleteSarah release the medical records and birth certificate!
Gryphen has spent 2 million dollars of his own money investigating this.
Sarah, please help Gryphen from going bankrupt.. just release the info.
Oh crap.. I forgot, you can't because it does not exist
I am sorry to hear that Professor Scharlott may pay the price for getting getting this national attention. He is obviously a man unafraid to ask questions, to seek truth. Perhaps he will eventually come out of this blessed as he should be for seeking the truth behind the lies. That he is being attacked so viciously is not surprising, though.
ReplyDeleteIt is almost as if there is a spell cast upon journalists from which they don't want to wake up.
One of these days, these same journalists and pundits will feel shame and self-disgust for having allowed themselves to push aside facts, for not asking simply questions and connecting the dots.
I hope we all remember who has taken which side as the years go by and never truly trust the faux journalists again, never give them credence.
We need to thank Professor Scharlott for putting himself in jeopardy and asking that those who claim to be journalists actually live up to the term and the ethics attendant upon the profession.
You are right, "I don't care what they call me so long as they call me to dinner." All publicity is good publicity on this topic.
ReplyDeleteMcCain has a system in place to keep secrets hidden. Nobody has been able to unseal his military records, or medical records. If the truth about Palin got out, it will be a major embarassment to the McCain camp. It would prove how little vetting was done. The destroying of all photos, plus computer files from many people's computers (Mercede's + others) shows that they KNEW about her lies, but kept it quiet. It should be brought out into public view, she is no longer anyone of importance, except in her own mind.
ReplyDeleteI just saw this at Salon and was very disappointed. Elliot misinterpreted and misrepresented the whole thing. I guess the criticism of the media hit a little too close to home. Does no one but Dr. Scharlott have a "still" spine?
ReplyDeleteSign up with Salon and comment!
ReplyDeleteYesterday I had a comment get through moderation on HuffPo encouraging them to cover this story, and just now went over to Salon to leave a comment - that article is a travesty. It just amazes me how stubbornly the media can ignore reality.
ReplyDeleteHere was my comment at Salon:
How to miss the point
The professor's paper is an indictment of the PRESS, not Sarah Palin. He writes about the spiral of silence. I write about the fact that the media is a wholly owned subsidiary of Massey Energy, BP, GE, Koch Industries and a few others.
The lies, lies of omission, and distortions the press engages in to serve their corporate masters are obscene and deserve scrutiny, not dismissal as in this article.
I suggest Mr. Elliott read the paper, watch the videos linked to below, and start afresh.
http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2011/04/professor-brad-scharlott-pops-palins.html
—Witsendnj
While we're on the topic of Salon, I wrote to Andrew Sullivan in 2008 about how upset I was, as a Native American (or an indigenous person) that Camille Paglia wrote this: that Sarah Palin MUST have some native heritage, and just not be aware of it, based on her "appearance." It was racist, fetishist, and disgusting. That's the sort of rot that they allowed to be published on Salon about Palin. I wish some journalism expert could do a paper on that.
ReplyDeleteJustin Elliot just became Exhibit A in validating Prof Scharlotts theory on the spiral of silence. Interested to see how many other media lemmings follow.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of whether or not she faked the birth, the press was absolutely derelict in its duty in not zeroing in on the fact that a vice presidential candidate displayed such appalling judgment in letting hours and hours go by after her water broke before going to a birthing facility.
ReplyDeleteI've never heard of such a thing. Ever. When the water breaks, you get to the hospital STAT.
They absolutely could have - and should have - covered her "unconventional" attitude about getting to a hospital in time.
I'm am happy Professor Scharlott's paper is mentioned in Salon.com.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the media is going to try and shame him for calling attention to their lazy "reporting" and half-assed vetting of a VP candidate.
Time will tell the tale, and in the end Professor Scharlott will be vindicated.
God bless Professor S. Speaking truth to power is rarely an easy path.
Salon has essentially proven the Professor's point.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, it's going to take a bigger fish than Salon to drag this iceberg, so no loss here.
I admit I fail to see how a discussion of the "spiral of silence" by a journalism professor is an embarrassment to an university. It certainly is a phenomena that is reasonable to explore. His example of this phenomena is the Trig birth story which some may argue is not an appropriate story, but that does not negate the importance of the underlying discussion. Salon has pretensions to intellectual inquiry; this is a big fail on their part. In my opinion, both issues in the Professor's paper are worthy of discussion.
ReplyDeleteAhh... 8:06, you are so right. Salon had become a Palin apologist on the Left. Explains everything.
ReplyDeleteI'm horrified that Bill M. had the audacity (and stupidity) to contact the Professor's colleagues and supervisors urging them to fire him.
ReplyDeleteAcademic FREEDOM means just that.
I think it's a rather brilliant strategy to come out with a story talking about the "paper" because it is in this way that they paper gets circulated and gives the MSM some cover at the same time. Publicity, I likes it!
ReplyDeleteThe lame stream media has no interest in your conspiracy theories on Trig's birth and your ideas of Him not being my child. Stop fretting about it before it drives you all crazy. crazier.
ReplyDelete~Sarah
I agree. The Mitch McConnell issue says it all. I too gave up on Salon a long time ago. BORING.
ReplyDeleteOT - Glenn Beck Throws Sarah Under the Bus!
ReplyDeletefrom Politico:
Glenn Beck: Sarah Palin is not running, damaged her brand
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53008.html
The timing of this paper is rather interesting, especially coming from a trusted academic. Any possibility the GOP is now pulling out the big guns to put the final touches on whisking Sarah Palin from serious consideration as a presidential candidate?
ReplyDeleteShe's actually finished already, but I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't make enough enemies within her own party - as she always inevitably does - for them to make the unnecessary but thoroughly enjoyable step of putting this issue front and center...finally.
One of the comments on there by a Susan Wood made a light go off in my head and explains the wild ride, as well as Palin's lack of appearing very pregnant until the very end:
ReplyDeleteShe flew back to have the birth induced early (earlier than 7.5 months - she wasn't pregnant as long as was claimed) so it wouldn't ruin her chances at being picked for the VP nom.
If she had given birth in June or July, there is no way McCain could have picked her in August. It was a stretch picking someone with a special needs child that is 6 months old, but one that is a month or 2?
I don't know if birth certificates declare at what stage of pregnancy the baby is born, perhaps that is why they don't release it.
This scenario in my mind totally fits Palin's personality, and answeres alot of questions.
I think due to her having fallen in the ratings of late and the fact we never see her written about or in the news (except for FOX), journalist are not interested in picking this up.
ReplyDeleteWhat should be done, in my opinion, is when we learn where she is speaking - or traveling - that this information be forwarded to the parties involved as well as the newspaper in that particular location. It should go to the one that has hired her to speak (as well as their Board members) most assuredly.
The Salon reporter obviously didn't even read the whole paper. If he did, then he needs to go take some remedial reading classes. Everyone please go to Salon and comment...he's getting criticized as he well deserves, but we need to keep it up.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Camille Paglia come right out and say that she had the hots for Palin during the Pres. campaign? Wonder how she's feeling about her now.
ReplyDelete@Dinty. Baby Trig in the hospital hallway is not a preemie born at 7.5 months. Forget that theory.
ReplyDeleteI don't get it, when Palin criticizes the media she is rewarded with more stories about her.
ReplyDeleteDinty has a theory that "explains the wild ride, as well as Palin's lack of appearing very pregnant until the very end:
ReplyDeleteShe flew back to have the birth induced early (earlier than 7.5 months - she wasn't pregnant as long as was claimed) so it wouldn't ruin her chances at being picked for the VP nom."
Dinty, I'm sorry but that is a very unrealistic theory. There is NO way that any doctor would induce labor at 7 months or earlier. No way. Not even in crazy ass Alaska (and I mean that only in the context of babygate, Alaskans ;). Please explain how this theory explains the wild ride, exactly?
In addition, how does your theory jibe with the pictures of the suddenly ginormous belly on 4/13?
One of the things that simply dumbfounds me about Palin and the members of her shithead posse is that they seem pathologically incapable of letting any perceived slight pass uncommented upon, even if it clearly would be in their best interests to do so.
ReplyDeleteDoes Elliot not realize that by giving this issue MORE time in the public eye that it is likely to get even MORE attention from the press and thus MORE time in the public eye?
Aside from proving Scharlott's point, drawing the MSM's attention to the story, and proving that he is a Palin panty sniffer, Elliot's article is pretty useless.
gryph...
ReplyDeletei love ya. i do i do i do..
but the pics of sarah, i gotta say that she looks pregnant.
im sorry. i WANT to believe and i totally think that she is capable of that...
but i gotta be honest. she looks pregnant in all of them.
Andrew Sullivan is on the job...
ReplyDeletehttp://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.
com/2011/04/a-paper-on-the-press
-and-trig.html
Your theory is bullshit, 9:29. All the photographic evidence available (i.e. that wasn't so suspiciously SCRUBBED from the State of AK web site and the Johnstons' computers as soon as Palin hit the big time) PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that Palin was NEVER pregnant and that the whole Trig pregnancy/birth scenario is an elaborate hoax.
ReplyDeleteYour empress ain't wearing NO clothes, maternity or otherwise.
Beck Says: Palin is not running, because she is an idiot.LOL
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53008.html
Here is a confession that Salon had yesterday. You see it on the sidebar of the same page as the Sharlott Spiral of Silence story.
ReplyDelete"The family I hid from my wife.
I fell in love with Lisa, and we had a child. There was only one problem: I was already married with three kids "
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/11/secret_family/index.html
...
But three children and 20 years later, we had nothing in common and nothing to say to each other. We hadn't had sex in years, and we did not miss it. There is nothing unusual about what caused our alienation: The long hours I worked to give my family a good life, an accumulation of hurts and resentments, poor communication. There is something unusual, however, in what happened next. Four years ago, I met an American woman and fell madly in love. She became pregnant with my child, a secret I kept from my wife.
...
But there was a big problem. I was married, and, initially, so was she. We could tell no one of our attachment -- her, the home wrecker, and me, the philanderer. So, we created our own reality, our own set of rules and understandings.
It's not just the politicians that do this?
The press is covering their ass, just as they did when they fell for W's pre-Iraq War 'weapons of mass destruction" crap that any moron could see was a weak tissue of lies.
ReplyDeleteThe MSM will not break this. It's going to take someone with balls who was very close to Sarah and is now alienated from her to open their mouth and sing. But since Sarah surrounds herself with limp, impotent ground feeders, that is unlikely to happen.
Imagine the rabid, pro-life Bagger reaction to harming a fetus/baby if the main participant in the "Wild Ride" was, say, a Democratic congresswoman--much less a VP candidate. Faux News, RW websites and Fundie churches would all weigh in and have a lovely, finger-pointin' field day; while the corporate owned MSM would drag her name through the mud over and over.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Princess Not-So-Bright gets a free pass and is raised to the level of folk hero among her brainwashed base. Not one of these nimrods brings up the potential harm she could have done to her baby with this insane shenanigan--that is, if it were a real baby, and not just an artfully placed accent pillow.
O/T but have you seen Bristol's latest Candies ad?
ReplyDeletehttp://nomadicjoe.blogspot.com/2011/04/only-one.html
Yes, Virginia Voter, I bet Prof Scharlott is tracking the response he gets in this paper. (I bet this will be his next paper!) So far, as you say, the response of McAllister and Salon has proved him correct.
ReplyDeleteI'm dismayed that so many people are not really readers -- and won't bother to read the Scharlott paper before criticizing it. At least that won't be true at his university, I assume -- they will surely realize at once what a good paper on a v important subject this is.
Bravo, once again Prof Scharlott!
Maybe Sarah Palin's methods of hiding the truth are finally being used against her. When she wants to stop a rumor in it's tracks, she throws out a fish line to the media. The line, of course, is lies (death panels), or decoys to get people focused on what she has to SAY, and not what she wants people to HEAR.
ReplyDeleteIf Justin Elliott and other writers write unflattering pieces on Mr.Scharlott's paper, the attention drawn to the subject over and over again will elicit more curiosity; but this time, the curiosity will direct people to the eventual truth instead.
Indignant journalists may be unaware that while they try to protect Sarah from an embarassing intimate birth experience, they are leading readers straight to the mystery. A decoy isn't working in Sarah's best interests this time.
Sure they printed the article, in such small type that I would need a magnifying glass to read it, and I have on the strongest reader glasses made at this time.
ReplyDeleteThe article is printed but buried at the same time.
LOL. Talk about sticking your head in the sand.
Justin Elliott published it. I was initially disappointed but now I think he was just covering himself with those remarks.
ReplyDeleteThe aforementioned article reflects first and foremost the painfully clumsy machinations of the professor's inept public relations conduit and his disastrous judgment in selecting such banal representation.
ReplyDeleteThat an individual with a doctorate in media theory and a woman who claims to possess 15+ years of brand management experience were unable to craft a more compelling narrative says as much about the state of our media–and its concomitant derivatives–as does the Dr. Scharlott's paper.
Just because I agree with the professor's hypothesis, does not mean I abide such sloppy, undisciplined work product.
Anon 9:11 - sorry, but usually bible believing christians refer only to Him (with capital H) as Jesus, Lord of Lords, King of Kings. Your reference to Trig as Him.......just saying.
ReplyDeleteSarah (God bless her!) is assiduously gathering her medical records, family birth certificates, family arrest records, and tax returns in preparation for her run for the presidency of our great nation.
ReplyDeleteSO LEAVE HER ALONE.
@Dinty: Also, no doctor in their right mind would risk inducing a baby at 7 1/2 months, especially a special needs baby. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, I do think the professor's paper a little "thin" and characterizing it as an "academic-style" effort, although unflattering, is probably spot on.
ReplyDeleteHowever, his subject matter is entirely righteous and I also applaud him for sticking his neck out. I just wish he had included the Elan Frank video and pictures. . .to me, this seals the deal. Anyone reading his paper who would take the time to view these could not be help at least admit that there is substantial ground for the MSM to question this.
Why do I think the MSM ignored this, but pursued the Obama birther topic and Edward's (and others') affair? Basically, misogyny.
Because this story has to do with women's plumbing, women's body parts, no one wants to touch it, feels it is "beneath" journalistic investigation to do so. The little boys of Big Journalism find these topics "icky" and "mysterious." Afraid, just as the professor alleges, of being made fun of. A guy bonking someone other than his wife? Fair game, although if you think about it, an extramarital affair has far little to do with how that candidate or office holder governs.
In fact, it has nothing to do with it, when you get right down to it.
But Palin faking a pregnancy, for whatever reason, is a huge and unusual thing for a politician to do. And then to make political hay on the back of it, highly unethical.
I still think the lack of inclusion of the Elan Frank video in his paper was a big mistake.
I am sorry but Justin Elliot should be ashamed of himself. The professor wrote a research paper comparing TWO "birth" stories. One has been covered to death by the media. One has not.
ReplyDeleteWhy? I would really love to know.
I like to believe Elliott´s negative tone is the only ¨safe and acceptable¨ approach Salon would permit him for this ¨taboo¨ topic.
ReplyDeleteWhatever the motivation one thing is clear: The good Professor´s paper is on Salon for all to read.
Professor Scharlott´s paper speaks for itself and needs no introduction.
¨Sarah¨ @ 9:11:
ReplyDeletePost this, verbatim, on your FB page:
¨Hello, my fellow patriots. I just wanted to thank you all for your support and to wish you all a productive and happy April.
Love, Sarah.¨
If you are sarah, it is an easy confirmation for you to make. Your followers will jump for joy because you made their day. If you are not sarah, you´ve just been outed.
Justin Elliot has an update.
ReplyDeleteIt's a double down on what he said before.
Be sure to check the links in his update.
"We in the media keep yelling there is nothing to see." And if anyone says otherwise, we'll repeat it again. "We in the media keep yelling there is nothing to see". (Which was really what Scharlott said. If they'd bothered to read.)
The MSM will not break this.
ReplyDeletebecause nobody wants to become Dan Rather. He spoke the truth and was fired for it because he couldn't prove his claims.
OT, Hey Gryphen, Idea!!!!!! Maybe you or someone else out there with the skills should start a similar blog on The Donald. Talk about scandals. A whole staff would need to be hired to keep up, but there is much to reveal and how much fun it would be to see how he would react. Not that you have anything else to keep you busy!
ReplyDeleteLoveAndKnishes@10:41
ReplyDelete"Princess-Not-So-Bright"..............Perfect!
Good lord. Anybody with half a brain that read "the wild ride" in her own words , I might add, can only come to one of two conclusions. Either she was trying to kill trig or it was completely made up.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess the question is, will other journalists treat this paper with the same obvious disdain that Eilliott did, or are there any REAL journalists left?
ReplyDeleteNo
10:11 said :
ReplyDelete"gryph...
i love ya. i do i do i do..
but the pics of sarah, i gotta say that she looks pregnant."
If you're referring to the "pics" that are discussed in Scharlott's paper, you are exceedingly slow. Go back to school.
Folks, face it. Salon is terrible. They are just like HuffPo--eager to use a Palin topic for the ad hits but not willing to investigate.
ReplyDelete"The aforementioned article reflects first and foremost the painfully clumsy machinations of the professor's inept public relations conduit and his disastrous judgment in selecting such banal representation.
ReplyDeleteThat an individual with a doctorate in media theory and a woman who claims to possess 15+ years of brand management experience were unable to craft a more compelling narrative says as much about the state of our media–and its concomitant derivatives–as does the Dr. Scharlott's paper.
Just because I agree with the professor's hypothesis, does not mean I abide such sloppy, undisciplined work product."
He he he. Somebody needs to step away from the thesaurus! You've got nerve calling anybody's writing "sloppy" or "undisciplined". The irony!
lilly lily said...
ReplyDeleteSure they printed the article, in such small type ...
I take it that you didn't try clicking on it?
And the silence keeps spiraling
ReplyDeleteI used to think the question of Trig's birth was silly, too. Then one day I actually read Palin's account of the Wild Ride and Trig's miraculous birth, and I looked at the photographs that are available. I talked to people who saw her shortly before she gave birth who said she did not look pregnant in the slightest.
Very, very little of the evidence adds up to the story Palin presents. She herself has done nothing to settle a question that she could have killed a long, long time ago.
As a former journalist, I wouldn't presume to speculate what the answer is to this weirdness. But Elliott is merely endorsing Scharlott's (and Sullivan's) entire point, which is that working journalists unaccountably backed way off this story given the odd, obvious conflicts and unanswered questions surrounding a politician who lies constantly about matters big and small.
The difference between Mrs. Palin and President Obama is that he HAS made public all the evidence necessary to debunk Obama birthers--they just won't accept it. Meanwhile, three years later the press continues covering these debunked claims.
There has never been any substantial debunking of the Trig Truther rumor. She's gone out of her way to avoid resolving it, in fact. Read the email exchange between her and the editor of the Anchorage Daily News if you doubt that. He had already concluded the rumors were "nonsense" and practically begged her to put the rumors to rest. She ignored the opportunity.
The fact that Palin chose to drag her unwed, pregnant, teen-age daughter onto the national stage to refute an obscure rumor posted on a liberal site proved to me that her ambition is her overriding quality. She used Bristol as a human shield to defend herself against questions no one was asking publicly.
From the comments:
Why would she allow such a cloud to hover over her son and daughter when she could so, so easily prove "Trig Truthers" to be idiots?
This is more than a matter of gossip; it says everything about her character and her true values--and about the press's decision-making process.
Anyone who thinks such a public figure wouldn't risk something like this has forgotten our most recent example of self-deluding arrogance: John Edwards. It wasn't the mainstream press that dared investigate those rumors, either.
Trump and Palin's $2 million birther lie
ReplyDeletehttp://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/11/trump_palin_two_million_birther/index.html
8::13 am. Or Rand Paul.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe how many journalism experts read this blog.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason, Elliott seems annoyed that Scharlott's publicist sent him the paper. Why he felt compelled to write about it is a mystery.
ReplyDeleteElliott also seems to think the Truther story has been covered extensively and found to be baseless. That is simply not true. Someone should do a poll to gauge awareness of both the Birther and Truther stories and see which is more well known.
Gryphen, I hope you will see this video. It reminds me of you and your sensitivity to others. Perhaps you will want to post it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzgzim5m7oU&feature=player_embedded
Another new article on the Scharlott paper.
ReplyDeletehttp://moviecitynews.com/2011/04/the-return-of-the-trig-birthers/
This is a frankly embarrassing reaction from the Salon writer! There is a line where he says, as if the professor is absurd for providing it, that the article includes a picture of an almost full term Palin with a flat stomach. I fully expected the next line to explain why this was absurd. It did not. It just moved on to something else. What the hell??
ReplyDeleteGryphen - What you wrote is just great. Thanks for being the smart, insightful, diligent and decent human being that you are.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDelete"Embarrassing to Northern Kentucky University."
Nowhere nears as embarrassing to your state as Mitch McConnell.
8:13 AM. And Rand Paul!
What's up is down and what's down is up!
ReplyDeleteJustin Elliott is proving the very point that Dr. Scharlott is making in his paper. The discussion of a contemporary media phenomena cannot be embarrassing for an academic institution. The embarrassment is the state of our media.
Another Elliott (in this case, Spitzer) just moderated a discussion between two Muslim women on Sarkozy's government's ban on the wearing of traditional dress. He was taking the side of government not telling women what to do! This from a man who paid big bucks to prostitutes?
The world and media in particular has gone crazy!
I gather this incomprehensible to one as linguistically-impaired as yourself, Anonymous 12:24, but I am immune to the petulance of any individual who cannot correctly define the word irony.
ReplyDeleteBy all means, however, try again.
Sarah @ 9:11, you needn't refer to TriG as "Him." He isn't Jesus.
ReplyDelete12:36, and the silence keeps spiraling....
ReplyDeleteExcellent comment. I wish you would post it on Salon.
I can't believe how many Sarah Palin BFFs read this blog.
ReplyDeleteThe problem the media has with the Trig story is the diversion planted right after Palin was picked for VP on the GOP ticket. The rumor about Bristol being Trig's mother was published early, then discredited when Palin announced Bristol's 5 month pregnancy.
ReplyDeleteEver since then, each and every main media outlet uses only this rumor to show how crazy ANY question about Trig's origins is, rather than dropping the Bristol angle and looking deeper into the issue.
Justin Elliott is on Hardball tonight. Caught the end of the discussion, not about the professor.
ReplyDeleteTo all the twisted sisters who are worried about me using a capital H when refering to Trig as Him. I do it on purpose.
ReplyDelete~Sarah
"I gather this incomprehensible to one as linguistically-impaired as yourself, Anonymous 12:24, but I am immune to the petulance of any individual who cannot correctly define the word irony.
ReplyDeleteBy all means, however, try again."
Is this McAllister?! The courtliness is unmistakeable.
Anywho, it's ironic that you characterized Scharlott's writing as poor, as your own writing is poor. Is that accurate enough for you?
Oops, Elliott was on Cenk Uygur
ReplyDeleteAnon at 1:25 is right: the gem public doesn't know the story of the Wild Ride. The night IM posted he paper, I discovered my own husband didn't know how fishy the story was. And I've been an avid trigger since 08, and he knew her "superwoman" image was a lie immediately.
ReplyDeleteIf only Tina Fey would read the Wild Ride story verbatim on tv...
But the GOP will only allow the true Wild Ride story as a nuclear option. It is too embarrassing to the entire party leadership, not just McCain.
Dan Rather was brought down by some of the same people who are behind the Palin/Trig Hoax, as well as the Swift Boating of John Kerry, Whitewater " and much more.
ReplyDeleteNot exactly the identical cast of characters in each case, but overlapping, with some of the same (often inherited) money paying for it.
As Chuck Heath once carelessly said, Sarah is just doing what "they" tell her to do.
So, Sarah is not totally in control -- in fact the big boys might be worried that she is way too out of control. (It is my fervent hope that she turns on them some day.)
Meanwhile, it should be possible for journalists to cover this story without being fired for relying on dubious evidence (as happened with Rather, though his basic story was almost certainly true).
If a particular smoking-gun bit of evidence shows up and looks too good to be true, it is probably a trap. Journalists know this and are proceeding with great caution.
But...there is enough material on the record and enough in the way of outright contradictions from Palin herself, that all one has to do is lay out the record in its entirety.
Just report it... and let the informed public decide.
Thank you, Prof Scharlott for getting this ball rolling. And thank you Gryphen, Andrew Sullivan, and fellow-bloggers for your perseverance and courage in keeping the story alive.
Even Salon has just performed a valuable service in a back-handed sort of way.
Great ad from a born again, re-virginated fornicator.
ReplyDeleteAnywho, it's ironic that you characterized Scharlott's writing as poor, as your own writing is poor. Is that accurate enough for you?
ReplyDeleteFrom the mouth of gifted wordsmith Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Furthermore, I never characterized Dr. Scharlott's communication as 'poor' and was plainly referring to the functional illiteracy of his publicist, Ms. Campana.
Keep trying, Sparky; it'd be my pleasure to spank you again.
If only Tina Fey would read the Wild Ride story verbatim on tv...
ReplyDeleteThat's a great idea.
Hoist by her own petard.
Jessie Cornball, please get some therapy. You're acting out and it is painful to watch. By the way, go back and reread your earlier comment; what you wrote isn't as you appear to remember.
ReplyDeleteAnd Sarah, you are a blasphemous dope. America likes you less and less each day. But I do hope you'll continue to fleece your foolish fans. They deserve it. And Trig needs the money.
ReplyDeleteWow. It's easy to see when the heat gets turned up on the Palins. All of a sudden all the defenders and name callers feel the need to be here in full force.
ReplyDeleteAnon: 9:46 am
ReplyDeleteCamille Paglia is a narcissistic, shallow bitch who, like Twitler, wants to be a man.
They certainly "act" like men--there's no sisterhood there for any woman, most of whom they simply throw under the bus.
Jesse Cornish must sniff glue daily, his little brain appears to be in freefall.
ReplyDeleteDefine inbred: one who indicts the reading comprehension of another, while failing to grasp the distinction between an individual and his parody. If only the hillbillies at Politicalgates would stick to their virtual cesspool.
ReplyDelete