Unfair Press as Energizer Bunny

Although someone reading over this blog’s archives would probably deduce that I am fanatical Palin backer, I am really not. I very much like the idea of Palin (small town girl makes good, etc.), and do not think she is much — if any — worse than other prominent Republicans, but I do not automatically assume she is any better either. She has my good will, but not necessarily my vote yet (assuming she runs for office in the future).

That said, the consistent — and consistently unfair — attacks on her is one of the few topics that get under my skin and spurs me to add my two cents to the discussion. That is the reason there are a disproportionate number of pro-Palin posts on this blog.

And once again Palin, directly and indirectly, is being unfairly maligned.  Over the weekend, the anti-Palin Alaska Report blog reported as fact that Sarah and Todd were on the outs, and planned to divorce.  In response, Meg Stapleton (a Palin staffer) updated Palin’s Facebook page with a small release categorically denying the rumors.  Apparently in response to significant mainstream media interest, Stapleton also sent emails to various media organizations, and was interviewed by Politico.

Although no large media outlets had reported the story before receiving the Palin statement, there was at least enough interest generated by the false claims for those media outlets to start asking questions.

Anti-Palin commenters on blogs and forums had the predictable knee-jerk reaction of ignoring the blatant lies that started the mess, and then blaming Palin for trying to drum up media attention.The hatred from the far left is predictable, but the same meme has also spread into the mainstream.  In the Politico article cited above, after noting that Stapleton had received numerous ‘media inquiries,’ the author has the gall to say:

By having her spokeswoman repeat the charges to rebut them in a public form, Palin effectively guaranteed coverage from the mainstream media that otherwise would not report claims attributed to unnamed sources on an anonymous blog.

(Link in original.)  Tommy Christopher, on the Mediaite blog (“the website of and about the media”), takes issue with the Conservatives4Palin (C4P) article that attempted to show that Stapleton was reacting to the media, not using the denial to attract attention.  His problem?  The C4P article calls the blogger that spread the lies a “CNN journalist.”  Although the C4P more often refers to the blogger as a CNN ‘stringer,’ and he has indisputably provided material to CNN in the past, that is still not acceptable to Christopher, who defines the difference between a stringer and a freelancer, then states:

His story about the Palin rumor has nothing at all to do with CNN — or Meg Stapleton’s decision to use Facebook to address it publicly.

The larger issue here is, why would Palin supporters try so hard to make this connection? As I noted yesterday, the value of another overreaching media victim story is far outweighed by the damage inflicted by elevating this rumor to a national news story.

(Link in original.)  The error in attributing too great a connection between the blogger and CNN, in Christopher’s mind, totally negates any legitimate reason for making a public statement.

This meme is not restricted to online media, either.  Washington Post columnist Howard Kurtz also chimed in:

The blog AlaskaReport says flatly that Sarah and Todd Palin are divorcing — which her spokeswoman denied on Facebook — and the mainstream media don’t touch it. The denial, naturally, drew some attention online.

Aside from the obvious blame-the-victim (or, more precisely, blame-Sarah-Palin-no-matter-what) problem with the media reaction to Palin’s response to the lies, I am a little baffled by the assumption that just because the rumor was online means any response is an overreaction. Especially when that idea is pushed by at least two online-only media organizations.  As C4P points out in the linked article (referencing Trig trutherism),  Palin has direct experience with crazy online rumors crossing over into more mainstream sources.  Even without the crossover, online lies are directly responsible for what many who do not like Palin believe about her:  banning books, making victims pay for rape kits, thinks dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, likes personally shooting wolves from helicopters,  seeing Russia from her house (well, that one is SNL, but still fits), etc.

Even aside from that, there is a far more important point to take away from all of this.

Keep in mind that the sum total of Palin’s action was to have a staffer put up a blurb on her official Facebook page, and respond to media requests.  Palin did not call a press conference or otherwise to try to broadly publish her refutation of the lies. In fact, it is clear that the media interest was there before Palin’s response.

This is not a case of Palin trying to put herself in the limelight; instead, it is yet another example of how the media cannot get enough of Sarah Palin.  All those lefties complaining about Palin trying to get attention (in the most roundabout way imaginable) need to take up their complaints with a media establishment that seems to be obsessed with Palin.  And those in the media so eager to blame her for that need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.