[Nonsuch]

Very interesting remarks from Diane Sawyer. Apparently she and the rest of the media are finally realizing that Dean was struggling to be heard over hundreds of shouting supporters not picked up by his microphone. And wouldn't you know it? The newsies admit they went a little overboard.

Dean's boisterous countdown of the upcoming primaries as we all heard it on TV was isolated, when in fact he was shouting over the roaring crowd.

And what about the scream as we all heard it? In the room, the so-called scream couldn't really be heard at all. Again, he was yelling along with the crowd.

Neal Gabler, Senior Fellow, Lear Center USA: "When you're talking about visuals, context is everything. So, you've got a situation in which you have what I'd call the televised version of reality, which is not the same as the actual reality in room. You know in a situation like this, no one takes responsibility."

How do the networks see it? Here are comments from network executives to ABC News:

CBS News: "Individually we may feel okay about our network, but the cumulative effect for viewers with 24-hour cable coverage is -- it may have been overplayed and, in fact, a disservice to Dean and the viewers." -- Andrew Heyward, President - CBS News

ABC News: "It's always a danger that we'll use good video too much." -- David Westin, President - ABC News

CNN: "We've all been wrestling with this. If we had it to do over again, we'd probably pull ourselves back." -- Princell Hair, General Manager - CNN

Fox News: "It got overplayed a bit, and the public clearly thought that, too, and kept him alive for another round." -- Roger Ailes, Chairman and CEO - Fox News

Full story.

[thunderous_funker]

Glad to see they do have an ounce of integrity left, but then again the damage is already done.

Unless, of course, they want to run these apologies and admissions over the next couple of weeks as many times as they ran the hatchet peices.

Typical. Total horseshyt on page one headlines, the retraction in small print on page 54 a few weeks later.

[GG Allin]

I really don't think (hope) that that had much affect on the people who vote in the primaries. He was still really close in the polls. I think that a lot of staunch Republicans got a laugh out of it.

The TV media are shamelss manipulators of facts. I take every opportunity I have with friends and family to convey my attitude toward the press and TV in particular. It has such a strangle-hold on public opinion. We have to make it common knowledge that it is simply out of control.

Dean vs. Kerry? Kerry will win because he looks more presidential. This is a TV nation. It is all about appearances.

Kucinich is my guy though as far as Dems go.

[spacefreak]

So it takes 9 days for the Dean camp to get this story out? First it was a "rallying call", then it turned into a sort of self-admitted "I got a bit carried away". Now, it never really happened.

There were a lot of other cameras in the room, why did they only play the one that was buried in the crowd?

It's unusually coincidental that this new explanation comes out 24 hours after the campaign manager is replaced.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
So it takes 9 days for the Dean camp to get this story out? First it was a "rallying call", then it turned into a sort of self-admitted "I got a bit carried away". Now, it never really happened.

It's quite coincidental that this new explanation comes out 24 hours after the campaign manager is replaced.

Your ability to consistently blame the victim is astonishing. You missed your true calling as an Insurance Claims investigator.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Your ability to consistently blame the victim is astonishing. You missed your true calling as an Insurance Claims investigator.

Haha. That's funny (the claims investigator bit).

I don't consider Dean a victim. And I didn't consider him a victim when he asked Terry McAuliffe to tell the other candidates not to attack him.

Candidates are scrutinized, their positions, character, and personality are taken apart and examined as if under a microscope. It's all a part of campaigning to be President.

[The Mick]

I saw a video of his speech filmed by a man in the crowd to Dean's left, and man was that crowd LOUD! You could not hear Dean very well over all the noise in that room, so I can't blame the guy for yelling and getting pumped up, I would have.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Haha. That's funny (the claims investigator bit).

I don't consider Dean a victim. And I didn't consider him a victim when he asked Terry McAuliffe to tell the other candidates not to attack him.

Candidates are scrutinized, their positions, character, and personality are taken apart and examined as if under a microscope. It's all a part of campaigning to be President.

And when the presidents of news networks apologize for being unfair, you continue to say they weren't. Ok. I guess they are lying when they say it was uncalled for and unfair.

Or perhaps perryp can prove it was all at the behest of their Jewish Masters?

Why is it the responsibility of the Dean campaign to "get this story out"? As I recall, most people have been ignoring their complaints of mistreatment. Now the media admits it was unfair, and you criticize the Dean campaign for not getting them to apologize sooner?

And if Dean's new manager can get the news networks on their knees overnight, as you suggest, than you will soon be bowing to Dean, Consul for Life.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by The Mick:
I saw a video of his speech filmed by a man in the crowd to Dean's left, and man was that crowd LOUD! You could not hear Dean very well over all the noise in that room, so I can't blame the guy for yelling and getting pumped up, I would have.

My question is why did this version (or explanation) take so long to surface? The media began replaying the howl almost immediately, but where were the "it didn't happen like that" articles the following day? The day after? 4 days later? 7 days later?

Why did it take Diane Sawyer, the exclusive interview winner, to unearth this explanation if it was so painfully obvious to all those who were there, and why on the first full day of Ron Neel's reign as campaign manager?

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Why is it the responsibility of the Dean campaign to "get this story out"?

Because he wants to be President and is in the election fight of his life. That's why it is their responsibility. And as the candidate, Dean should have made sure his version of the story got out. That's what the successful ones do.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Because he wants to be President and is in the election fight of his life. That's why it is their responsibility. And as the candidate, Dean should have made sure his version of the story got out. That's what the successful ones do.

You don't remember Dean complaining about the media? I do. The more he complained, the more they labeled him and played the tip of "angry Dean". In fact, then they added the clips of him complaining about the media and set in on the "now he's angry at the media and blaming us. Wow, what an angry and looney person."

They torched him. You believed it.
We complained. You dismissed it.
The media finally cops to it. You blame Dean's campaign for not controlling the media.

[saab95]

Dean is into scream.

Scream is in.

Deal with it.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
You don't remember Dean complaining about the media? I do. The more he complained, the more they labeled him and played the tip of "angry Dean". In fact, then they added the clips of him complaining about the media and set in on the "now he's angry at the media and blaming us. Wow, what an angry and looney person."

It seems like all Dean does is complain. Complaining may work fine here on these forums, but it's rarely the solution.

Dean is finally learning that complaining ultimately gets one nowhere. The question becomes, is it too late?

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
They torched him. You believed it.
We complained. You dismissed it.
The media finally cops to it. You blame Dean's campaign for not controlling the media.

He blew it and made an ass out of himself. Then he complained, you complained, and all Dean supporters complained.

Unfortunately for the Dean camp, this has become way too frequent a pattern. Presidents don't complain and complain and complain. They analyze, look at potential solutions, decide on a strategy, then implement the solution.

Look back on Kerry's last 3 weeks of campaigning. That's exactly what he did. It looks like Dean is finally grasping the concept.

[itai195]

strategery, that's what wins!

[thunderous_funker]

You don't even know what you're talking about any more.

I guess the president never complained about the media's coverage of the Iraq war? Never suggested there was a "filter" that was only focusing on bad news?

First you alledge Dean should have done something (you don't say what) if the truth about the rally wasn't being told.

Then you dismiss the efforts at getting the truth out as so much whining.

And now that the truth is finally out, you still say its somehow Dean's fault that he got torched by the media in the first place or that he shouldn't waste his time defending himself.

I realize it would probably kill you to find yourself agreeing with me or, God forbid, sympathizing with Dean, but sometimes your insistance on being contrary only results in you making an ass of yourself.

[The Mick]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
My question is why did this version (or explanation) take so long to surface? The media began replaying the howl almost immediately, but where were the "it didn't happen like that" articles the following day? The day after? 4 days later? 7 days later?

Why did it take Diane Sawyer, the exclusive interview winner, to unearth this explanation if it was so painfully obvious to all those who were there, and why on the first full day of Ron Neel's reign as campaign manager?

I'm not sure, maybe there's some kind of conservative media bias?

Here's the link to the video if you would rather see things as the audience did, instead of the media using a line directly off the PA system:
http://www.webmastersforamerica.com/...dio/video1.htm

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by The Mick:
I'm not sure, maybe there's some kind of conservative media bias?

Here's the link to the video if you would rather see things as the audience did, instead of the media using a line directly off the PA system:
http://www.webmastersforamerica.com/...dio/video1.htm

I'd rather listen to it, as it is much funnier that
way. There is so much more ground to cover
before the elections, so why is this such a big
deal? He has plenty more time to do something
stupid again, and again, and again, and then
he can parade his wife on TV to make it all
go away. Par for the course.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by The Mick:
Here's the link to the video if you would rather see things as the audience did, instead of the media using a line directly off the PA system:
http://www.webmastersforamerica.com/...dio/video1.htm

Yeah...like I was saying before...this is the same camera used in the abc report linked in the initial post in this thread.

[kindbud]

Because Diane Sawyer says it never happened - I'm supposed to forget what I saw?

[ghost_flash]

No, he's still a nutball.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
And now that the truth is finally out, you still say its somehow Dean's fault that he got torched by the media in the first place or that he shouldn't waste his time defending himself.

I realize it would probably kill you to find yourself agreeing with me or, God forbid, sympathizing with Dean, but sometimes your insistance on being contrary only results in you making an ass of yourself.

Yup...I'm an ass because I don't agree with you...because I don't view these Dean events as a Dean supporter.

This has nothing to do with my views of Dean or any other Democrat. I have no personal stake in the Democratic nomination process; I am purely a spectator who is interested in politics and pays attention to political races of significance. I'm just making observations as I see them. I'm sorry you don't agree with me, but there is no need to get nasty and be obnoxious about it.

The truth is that, in my opinion, Dean acted like an ass. And yes, I think that is Dean's fault. CBS wasn't on stage. NBC wasn't on stage. Halliburton wasn't on stage. Howard Dean was.

If a leading presidential candidate can't grasp the fact that television coverage plays a large role in the campaign, then he shouldn't be running in the first place (or at least not with the hope of winning).

And I would think that you, as a Dean supporter, would make note of the observations made by me and others here and relay it to those staffing his run and recommmend that they make the proper adjustments to their campaign.

You can spend hours upon hours bitching at me all you want. But if Dean's campaign can't adjust to the observations and impressions his campaign is making on others who are watching (primarily Democrat voters), then your time is likely being wasted trying to convince a non-voter like me of Dean's so-called 'victimization'.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by kindbud:
Because Diane Sawyer says it never happened - I'm supposed to forget what I saw?

Where does Diane Sawyer say it never happened?

She said (in effect) it was misrepresented and overplayed.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
Where does Diane Sawyer say it never happened?

She said (in effect) it was misrepresented and overplayed.

Hmm. Do you think that Diane Sawyer would have said that if Dean were a conservative Republican? Call me a cynic but . . .

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Hmm. Do you think that Diane Sawyer would have said that if Dean were a conservative Republican? Call me a cynic but . . .

She would have probably said something along the line of: "It got overplayed a bit, and the public clearly thought that, too, and kept him alive for another round." .

[Developer]

Slightly off topic, but I believe the plural of "mea culpa" ought to be "meae culpae" not "mea culpas". And in this case "nostra culpa" would make more sense.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by Developer:
Slightly off topic, but I believe the plural of "mea culpa" ought to be "meae culpae" not "mea culpas". And in this case "nostra culpa" would make more sense.

I actually wondered about that when I was posting the topic, but I was too impatient to look it up.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Hmm. Do you think that Diane Sawyer would have said that if Dean were a conservative Republican? Call me a cynic but . . .

After that shrill, hectoring interview with the Deans, where she practically lambasted Judy Dean for preferring to pursue her career over acting as a smiling ornament for her husband's campaign, you really think Diane Sawyer is a liberal propagandist? Or did you just not know she used to write press releases for the Nixon White House?

Oh, but she's a mainstream TV journalist, expressing an iota of sympathy for a Democrat. Obviously she must be a liberal.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
Or did you just not know she used to write press releases for the Nixon White House?

Actually, I didn't know that. Nevertheless, she's never struck me as a conservative. Then again, I can't really stand to watch her anyway. I just don't like her sappy interviewing style.

[boots]

Sorry, TF. I'm with spacefreak on this one.

Yes, this got overplayed and blown out of proportion. Dianne Sawyer says maybe it was misinterpreted....

Dean didn't say this right after...he went on Letterman and said he got a little out of control with it. He sucked it up and tried to move on.....made fun of himself for it.

It is just one more in the line of miscues that make me like Dean less and less.

We'll see how he and Kerry do in the south.

[davesimondotcom]

The only time I think the Scream has been played too much is when the chimp on the Dennis Miller show got out of control with pressing the "Dean Button."

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by davesimondotcom:
The only time I think the Scream has been played too much is when the chimp on the Dennis Miller show got out of control with pressing the "Dean Button."

Right, to me the scream isn't something that the media hyped or didn't hype. It's just one of those defining moments you get in campaigns where something about the candidate "clicks" with the public as being emblematic (either fairly, or unfairly).

Sometimes it is an image like Dukakis in the tank, Ford tripping, Hart on the Monkey Business, and so on. Sometimes it is a comment like Reagan's "there you go again" about Carter or Bush Sr's out of touch amazement at supermarket scanners. Sometimes it can be positive like Clinton's "Sister Souljah moment." Whatever it is, those things just clicked as summing the candidate up. Dean's scream is the same thing. Nobody will need to hype it for it to stick because it fit in with an impression of Dean that has already formed.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Right, to me the scream isn't something that the media hyped or didn't hype. It's just one of those defining moments you get in campaigns where something about the candidate "clicks" with the public as being emblematic (either fairly, or unfairly).

Plus, that last thing any campaign needs is to reinforce a negative stereotype. There was already a perception that Dean could be angry and a bit out-of-control. His 'scream' just reinforced that image. If Lieberman or Gephart had done the same thing it wouldn't have received near the amount of attention.

Same thing happened to Dan Quayle. The public already had a perception of him being one taco short of a combination plate. Then he happens to spell 'potato' incorrectly on camera and it just reinforced that image. If he had done something against that perception it probably wouldn't have generated near the attention the gaffe did.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
... Nobody will need to hype it for it to stick because it fit in with an impression of Dean that has already formed.

And how did that form, excatly?

Oh, yes, because the journalists kept calling him 'angry.' That, too, was because of a single moment. The opening of Dean's "What I want to know, is..." speech at a Democratic convention where his eyebrows were arched and his speaking style was stern. That was the speech where he broke out onto the national scene (for those following the primaries even closer than I, like journalists).

It's all part of the "echo chamber" effect, or the "pack mentality" that you see so much in modern journalism.



BlackGriffen

[saab95]

Topic: Network mea culpa(s): "Dean Scream" overplayed and misleading

Really?

How overplayed is the truth?

[Ayelbourne]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Right, to me the scream isn't something that the media hyped or didn't hype. It's just one of those defining moments you get in campaigns where something about the candidate "clicks" with the public as being emblematic (either fairly, or unfairly).

I'm with Simey on this one. I watched the footage and, while it was much less remarkable than I expected after registering all the fuss about it, anyone who has seen Steve Ballmer onstage would know to shy away from any attempts at public-speaking acrobatics.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by saab95:
Really?

How overplayed is the truth?

I'm not alleging � nor is the article � that the misrepresentation is responsilbe for Dean's failure to win in New Hampshire, although it probably played a role. I'm simply pointing out that there was a misrepresentation, and that the media now admit it. Odd how some on the right can't seem to take them at their word.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by saab95:

Ignoring your comments, that was funny.

BG

Edit: on second thought, no need for the flame.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
I'm not alleging � nor is the article � that the misrepresentation is responsilbe for Dean's failure to win in New Hampshire, although it probably played a role. I'm simply pointing out that there was a misrepresentation, and that the media now admit it. Odd how some on the right can't seem to take them at their word.

Thank you!!

Sheesh. I'm amazed people can still be arguing that nothing happened even after the confessions to the fact.

[vmpaul]