CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › American Media in a Nutshell:
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

American Media in a Nutshell:

post #1 of 27
10/29/07 at 4:51pm
Thread Starter 
French President Sarkozy walks out of interview with 60 Minutes:

Link here.

More here.

Quote:
In the interview conducted earlier this month and aired Sunday night, he candidly discussed what he likes about the U.S. But he grew frustrated when asked about his wife, Cecilia, who helped negotiate the release of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor charged with infecting Libyan children with HIV and then failed to show up at a ceremony in which Sarkozy was given a medal by Bulgaria.

"If I had to say something about Cecilia, I would certainly not do so here," Sarkozy replied.

Even once venerable media institutions like 60 Minutes are no longer above harrassing the president of an allied nation about his marriage problems. God forbid we nosy Americans don't know all the ins and outs of the man's relationship with his wife.
Reply
post #2 of 27
10/29/07 at 4:55pm
Good for him. I'm tired of the constant harping about the private lives of these people. Don't be bothered with policy, what's he got to say about his sex life?!
Reply
post #3 of 27
10/29/07 at 5:12pm
I was sitting with my visiting parents last night and watching this. We all clapped and gave props when Sarkozy walked out. What the hell kind of question is that to ask a foreign leader? If you found out a stranger had just gotten a divorce and then you met the person, you wouldn't ask the stranger "Hey, what's up with you and the divorce I've been hearing about?" Just because some tabloid decided to post a person's private matter (doesn't matter if they are politicians as long as it doesn't affect their work), it doesn't mean you have the right to ask the person about it.
Reply
post #4 of 27
10/29/07 at 5:13pm
I just watched that video and all I have to say is Nancy O'Dell has really let herself go.
Reply
post #5 of 27
10/29/07 at 5:15pm
I'd have to assume that much of the clout she deployed in helping to secure the release of the nurses and doctor had to do with her husband's position. It seems like the interest in her role in his life might extend further than their sex life.

There was a thread here not so long ago in which questions were raised as to whether electing Hilary Clinton would result in some sort of co-presidency (and the same was probably occasionally asked when Bill was in office). When political power is wielded, in some way or another, by the spouse of a leader, I don't think it's all that unreasonable to expect the leader who was appointed the power to be questioned about it.

For all we know, 60 Minutes was going down the sleaze/romance path with this line of questioning, but Sarkozy cut it off before this was clear. There are some legitimate political questions that could be brought up in regard to his wife's actions, and I'm not sure it's unethical to ask him about them.
Reply
post #6 of 27
10/29/07 at 5:19pm
I didn't see it, but the questioning sounds pretty stupid. However, engaging in a circle jerk with your parents about it by applauding is gay.
Reply
post #7 of 27
10/29/07 at 5:27pm
I saw that interview and from I can gather. I swear Sarkozy was just fuckin with them. Not refusing to wear a microphone during the flight and then walking out after they asked about his wife which admittedly was a good move seeing how it is his private life.
Reply
post #8 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken
I saw that interview and from I can gather. I swear Sarkozy was just fuckin with them. Not refusing to wear a microphone during the flight and then walking out after they asked about his wife which admittedly was a good move seeing how it is his private life.
It's his private life if they ask him what kind of birth control he and his wife use or why they decided to get divorced. To bring up the fact that his wife has been in the news engaging in activity with potential political and legal ramifications - that's news. I get why Sarkozy might have left the interview - he's not obligated to answer to the American press. What I don't get is why everyone here is so ready to dismiss this as tabloid journalism without even hearing where 60 Minutes was going with it.
Reply
post #9 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:22pm
I can't imagine how any long-standing journalists can look at themselves in a mirror anymore.
Reply
post #10 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB
It's his private life if they ask him what kind of birth control he and his wife use or why they decided to get divorced. To bring up the fact that his wife has been in the news engaging in activity with potential political and legal ramifications - that's news.
But the questions being asked had no connection with those activities. If Stahl had asked about the power structure between him and his wife. That's a legitimate quesiton but to ask about the divorce outright, that's not the case.
Reply
post #11 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:33pm
Was there any leadup to the question? If she had started by stating a few facts about the power wielded or the political advice given by his wife, it might not have seemed so gossipy to ask about the state of his marriage. The way she asked the question ("it's a big mystery"), it was like Access Hollywood trying to get the exclusive on Britney and Kevin.
Reply
post #12 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken
But the questions being asked had no connection with those activities. If Stahl had asked about the power structure between him and his wife. That's a legitimate quesiton but to ask about the divorce outright, that's not the case.
All I've seen is the clip, but she starts with "Every day, we're hearing another story about your wife. What's going on?" This implies to me that there were going to be questions on his wife's activities, not necessarily just the state of their relationship.

The follow up is "But there's a great mystery... everybody's asking..." It seems to me it would be news if the divorce were, in any way, related to the fallout from his wife's recent actions (the support for the release of the doctors and nurses, the use of the Elysee Palace credit card for personal purchases).

I guess I prefer to save my righteous indignation for when the interview I'm supposed to be upset about actually occurs. There were some legitimate areas for inquiry and some bad ones, but it's impossible to say where Stahl was going with her interview.
Reply
post #13 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:56pm
Think of it this way:

Suppose Laura Bush decided to take up the cause of an abortion clinic bomber who inadvertantly killed some people, and her influence has a great impact on the sentence (I'm not drawing a direct parallel to the case of doctors and nurses and Libya, since I know very little about that). This is met with some controversy among not just pro-choice advocates, but by pro-lifers who don't advocate violent action. Suddenly, Laura is not so visible by her husband's side at public events.

If GWB were interviewed on 60 Minutes during this time, do you think Stahl would be stepping over the line to ask him about his wife?
Reply
post #14 of 27
10/29/07 at 6:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken
But the questions being asked had no connection with those activities. If Stahl had asked about the power structure between him and his wife. That's a legitimate quesiton but to ask about the divorce outright, that's not the case.
I don't think we can know that from the clip, though. She asked a question about his wife to set up the line of questioning. When he declined to answer, she asked again, pretty good-naturedly, in my opinion. Then he left. For all we know she was about to ask if his wife's political activities had something to do with their troubles. Read this again, from Jacob's original post:

Quote:
his wife, Cecilia, who helped negotiate the release of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor charged with infecting Libyan children with HIV and then failed to show up at a ceremony in which Sarkozy was given a medal by Bulgaria.
That's absolutely newsworthy. Can you honestly tell me that if Laura Bush did something like that, you wouldn't want to know a little more about it? I sure would.

Anyway, I'm with DaveB on this one. I like Sarkozy, and have no love for 60 Minutes. But I don't think we have nearly enough info to pile on them for this. From reading the full article (2nd link), it seems like Sarkozy didn't want to be there anyway, and just used it as an excuse to take off.

ETA: DaveB and I simul-posted.
Reply
post #15 of 27
10/29/07 at 7:59pm
Thread Starter 
The question was relating to her not appearing in public with him when he was given an award in Belgium and the rumors of their separation (the "big mystery" stuff). It had nothing to do with her assistance in helping broker the release of those nurses.

At any rate, Sarkozy himself obviously felt the questions were inappropriate.
Reply
post #16 of 27
10/29/07 at 8:18pm
Thread Starter 
By the way, the full interview is up at 60 Minutes' website, as well as other stories about Sarkozy and his divorce. An excerpt (bold text mine):

Quote:
In the past week, as speculation about his marriage reached fever-pitch, he continued to present an image of business as normal. He was to be in Portugal on Thursday for an EU summit.

Nicolas and Cecilia Sarkozy split for a few months in 2005, and she had seemed ill at ease as first lady since her husband's election in May. She did not cast a ballot in the runoff, and has rarely appeared with her husband in public in recent months.
Reply
post #17 of 27
10/29/07 at 11:18pm
If 60 Minutes was going for a line of questioning dealing with Sarkozy's wife and her leading to the release of the medical staff, then they could have started with a question about that. Instead they went with a question about the press, Sarkozy and his wife. From the beginning of the interview, the man was complaining about taking the time out of his schedule to have the interview. The question was asked once and he deferred on answering it. Move on. I'm not a reporter and just by sitting there on my sofa, I could tell that the man was not trying to stick around long. Once I heard the reporter's question, I knew things were going to end badly. So, bad form on 60 Minutes and I'm sure they loved every second of it by the way they kept hyping it up before the show.
Reply
post #18 of 27
10/29/07 at 11:30pm
Hey, why should news be informative when it could be entertaining? Because when I think entertainment, I think 60 Minutes.

Oh, and the stopwatch. I think about the stopwatch.
Reply
post #19 of 27
10/30/07 at 12:38am
If I was a journalist, I might if I had the chance to sit down for the one-on-one with the leader of one of the worlds great powers some serious questions like "Will French troops take a greater part in the war on terror", "How do you feel about nuclear weapons in Iran (given the France has been known to sell nuclear technology in the past)" or maybe "how do you feel about the resuragence of Russia" not...so you and your wife are getting divorced...what about her helping doctors and nurses, you know real questions
Reply
post #20 of 27
10/30/07 at 4:28am
You want to play up to the housewife demographic and ask about whether he's getting a divorce or who he's fucking? Go right ahead. Once he refuses to speak about it, stop pushing it. It's really not that big of a deal.

You want to pressure him? Ask him about his views on immigration, on crime, on international relations. For fuck's sake he's the head of a state not a soap opera actor. Do you really want to burn bridges over something as insignificant?

And keep in mind that he lives in a country where when the president was found to have an illegitimate daughter, this appeared on the front page of a major newspaper:"So what?"
Reply
post #21 of 27
10/30/07 at 11:08am
And what if their divorce or separation were brought about partially by her political activities?

It's like the example I posted with Laura Bush above - if she suddenly stopped appearing in public with her husband after participating in what could be construed as politically-charged activities, you'd be a shitty journalist to not ask about her.

The American media drop the ball with pretty great regularity these days, but this is such a non-event. Sarkozy should have just refused again and stuck it out. I'm sure there were questions to come on Iran, and it would have been good to hear what he had to say.
Reply
post #22 of 27
10/30/07 at 11:17am
Thread Starter 
I never said it was an "event", just that it was typical of current American journalism. A decent journalist would have saved the gossip-y stuff for the end of the interview.
Reply
post #23 of 27
10/30/07 at 3:47pm
Or left it off the table. How is it news, except in the most prurient sense, and even then, considering he's a French leader, I'd bet the farm that not many Americans give two $#!+$ anyway.

This is more of the same race-to-the-bottom BS that the corporate media excels at of late. Don't report the actual news, don't show the meat grinder of Iraq or the head-smacking incompetence at every level of Federal government, and God forbid! don't investigate any big money advertisers, but the marital problems of a French President is the most important subject to grill him about.
Reply
post #24 of 27
10/30/07 at 3:49pm
ps. the nurses are in a pretty complex and hairy situation. Worth looking into if you think the Premiere Femme committed some kind of transgressive act.
Reply
post #25 of 27
10/30/07 at 6:22pm
You see, I'd be willing to entertain the notion that maybe the reporter was going to ask follow-up questions tying back to the nurses situation, but the way 60 Minutes was hyping the fact that OMG, The French President Has Walked Out On An Interview With Us!!1! They also framed the whole interview by showing how Sarkozy has a "temper" and how pissed he was even doing the interview. I thought about it afterwards and it comes off looking like they were trying to preemptively excuse what was a bullshit question.
Reply
post #26 of 27
10/30/07 at 6:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt
ps. the nurses are in a pretty complex and hairy situation. Worth looking into if you think the Premiere Femme committed some kind of transgressive act.
My point wasn't that it was transgressive, but that it was controversial, thus worth a question or two. Perhaps Jacob's right in that such a touchy issue should have been pushed to the end of the interview, but I don't think it's in bad taste to ask questions about the guy's wife if some of her activities have a political component. This doesn't mean he has to answer them, and it doesn't even mean he has to stick around to finish the interview - but I don't see the problem with posing the questions.

I have no idea how 60 Minutes promoted this. I didn't see any ads, I didn't watch the show. I saw a bit of the interview via the link, and I read the write-up. From what I saw, I'm not convinced that Lesley Stahl - a reporter who never before struck me as particularly great or particularly terrible at her job - has somehow turned into Maury Povich or Geraldo. It's not indicative of the end of American journalism.
Reply
post #27 of 27
10/30/07 at 7:29pm
The question wasn't about the controversy surrounding the nurses; it was about their marital friction.

And I'm not comparing 60 Minutes to Maury Povich or Geraldo. More like Mary Hart and John Tesh. When a great, passionate journalist like Lara Logan has to sit there and lob stupid softballs at Erik Prince you can see the terrible descent of 60 Minutes from a hard-hitting news source to yet another arm of the corporate octopus.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › American Media in a Nutshell: