EveningStar Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Hit piece, or fair question? Forbes: Jeff Bercovici July 11, 2011 Sarah Palin is no fan of the “lamestream media” — except when she’s using it to serve her ends. Is she using Newsweek to get free personal training? And, if so, is that entirely legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casino67 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 A little bit about the author: "Jeff Bercovici learned a few things from his brief tenure with the now-defunct Radar Magazine. First, he found that digging up dirt on his industry can pay; Radar founder Maer Roshan hired him away from Women's Wear Daily after Bercovici uncovered a few of the machinations behind Radar's relaunch. Secondly, he learned that his profession is on some very thin ice; Radar shut its doors soon after Bercovici helped launch it yet again. (Source) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casino67 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Sort of what I was talking about: RE: PALIN‘S ’NON-SERIOUS’ NEWSWEEK COVER Over on the homepage side of things, Billy highlights the noxious observations of Washington Post‘s Jonathan Capehart who mocked Sarah Palin’s fashion sense on the cover of the most recent Newsweek: “She can’t possibly be taken seriously as a presidential contender dressed like that, especially since this is the second time she has graced Newsweek in a less-than-presidential pose,” Capehart writes, referring to Palin’s casual look. Seriously? I agree that image goes a long way in presidential politics, but since when is a determined, hands-on-the-hip pose “less-than-presidential”? I have a sneaking feeling his fashion critique has more to do with a personal disdain for Palin‘s politics than any substantive critique of the former Alaska governor’s image. Or perhaps Capehart is simply pining for the past days of mandatory pantsuit uniforms for female political contenders. Either way, lets look at a few scenarios which seem to directly challenge Capehart’s assertion. The Blaze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
righteousmomma Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Does this disprove the old maxim that "guys don't make passes at girls in glasses"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geee Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Sort of what I was talking about: RE: PALIN‘S ’NON-SERIOUS’ NEWSWEEK COVER Over on the homepage side of things, Billy highlights the noxious observations of Washington Post‘s Jonathan Capehart who mocked Sarah Palin’s fashion sense on the cover of the most recent Newsweek: “She can’t possibly be taken seriously as a presidential contender dressed like that, especially since this is the second time she has graced Newsweek in a less-than-presidential pose,” Capehart writes, referring to Palin’s casual look. Seriously? I agree that image goes a long way in presidential politics, but since when is a determined, hands-on-the-hip pose “less-than-presidential”? I have a sneaking feeling his fashion critique has more to do with a personal disdain for Palin‘s politics than any substantive critique of the former Alaska governor’s image. Or perhaps Capehart is simply pining for the past days of mandatory pantsuit uniforms for female political contenders. Either way, lets look at a few scenarios which seem to directly challenge Capehart’s assertion. The Blaze Thanks Casino for pointing that out!!! I am not pushing Sarah, though I like her, but am sick to death of PDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollyannaish Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 It comes down to this: Sarah Palin is so polarizing, she sells magazines. Period. To the lovers AND the haters. So is she using the press? Of course she is. Is the press using her? Of course they are. It is the quintessential symbiotic relationship. BOTH sides have agendas and they both need each other. At the end of the day, the press is the one that makes the determination as to whether or not they are willing to be used. It is 100% their call. They can decide NOT to cover things if they jolly well please. Just as President Obama about the coverage of his past. As far as the lack of a presidential pose, I think it plays to her strength right now which is being "a regular American." She isn't running at this point, so she hasn't put on the uniform yet. I personally think she is positioning herself as the Norma Rae of the regular folks, not the next Ronald Reagan. I still admire the woman and definitely listen to what she has to say...even if she's not top on my list of presidential contenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
righteousmomma Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 What pollyannish said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cudjo Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Pollyannish said it quite well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evad Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Pollyannish said it quite well Double that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickydog Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now