7 Reasons Why Gibson Got The Get

Tonight, Charlie Gibson and a crew from ABC News will pack up and head to Alaska for his interview with the elusive and press-wary GOP vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. After Palin bypassed two Sundays of potential interviews and attacked the media in her convention speech, after she was pointedly made unavailable to the press, and after John McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis blustered on Fox News Sunday that she wouldn't suffer an interview until the media was ready to treat her with "deference and respect" — well, after all that, it was finally announced that the McCain campaign had picked ABC's Gibson for the honor. He'll interview her tomorrow and Friday — September 11th and 12th — and broadcast the results to an eager, Palin-starved world.

There are lots of articles about what questions Gibson should ask her, or how tough he should be. This post isn't about that — it's about answering this question: Why did the McCain camp choose Charlie Gibson in the first place?

As much as Democrats, angry at Gibson's tough questioning of Barack Obama at the April 16, 2008 debate, may think that he was chosen because he was favorable to the GOP, I don't think that was the reason (nor do I think Gibson is a GOP shill; it was just a boneheadedly-handled debate). But the McCain campaign had three choices — three network anchors, each with viewers in the multi-millions — and I have no doubt that Brian Wiliams and Katie Couric put in the request. Here's why I think they went with Gibson:

(1) The GOP hates NBC. That was pretty obvious during the anti-media chants of "NBC, NBC" during Palin's convention speech (lest you forget). That probably disqualified Brian Williams right off the bat. But if it hadn't, probably this would have:

(2) Gibson is of the McCain generation: Charlie Gibson is the eldest of the Big Three, recently turned 65 to BriWi's 49 and Katie's 51. He's an older white male, old enough to be Palin's father, actually (not unlike McCain). On the scales of "deference and respect" that gulf would probably make a different — both Williams and Couric would be facing her on more equal footing as colleagues from the same age and stage. And speaking of equal footing:

(3) Charlie Gibson is not a woman. Unlike Katie Couric! Who would be far less likely to face charges of sexism, and thus would have less reason to be extra-careful. A woman asking about Palin's family life, balancing home and work, questioning her experience — well, call me sexist but it would just feel different. (Don't call me sexist. It's just a fact.) Also, along those lines...

(4) Katie would be out for the jugular. Come on. Why on earth would she hold back? She's coming off a convention bounce of her own, and would be looking to make headlines — not friends. (Well, Sarah started it!) See above - she'd have no reason to back down if things got testy. Why would the McCain campaign risk Palin being unfavorably compared to another woman? More than a little of her power and popularity is based on her gender and femininity and the power that comes from that. Given time to think about it, I'm sure this reason would even have trumped GOP hate for NBC. But even if so, consider this:

(5) BriWi gets hunting. Every so often on his blog, Brian Wiliams will mention Cabela's, a small chain of ten giant sporting goods stores that specialize in hunting, fishing, and the real outdoors. He reported on it for the 2004 election, pointing out that in 2000 "six in ten gun owners voted for George W. Bush" (that stat held in 2004). Cabela's customers are "people that hunt and fish and believe the phrase, 'Under God' belongs in the Pledge of Allegiance." This is BriWi's area of expertise — Cabela's people, NASCAR people, people who don't think New York is America. More knowledge and more comfort equals less deference. Hell, he might even ask a question about aerial wolf hunting. Why risk it?

(6) Okay, maybe they have reason to think that Gibson would serve up softballs. I rapped Gibson for his super-deferential interview of President Bush at Camp David over Thansgiving, and as Greg Sargent points out at TPM, he was the only anchor to interview McCain at the GOP convention. Per Sargent: "Gibson has been granted exclusives with McCain and his running-mate, which is unusual favoritism by any measure. There's something about Gibson that McCain advisers appear to like a great deal." Maybe! Though I still would not count the April 16th debate as a reason here — if anything, the backlash from that would probably inspire tougher questioning.

(7) They like him! The really like him! Maybe the McCain campaign chose Gibson because they respect his journalistic integrity, like his newscast, and trust him to give a fair and unbiased interview. That is entirely possible and nothing in this post is meant to say that he would do anything else. But come on. We're talking about the McCain campaign here. Sex ed ad? The "lipstick on a pig" sexism kerfuffle? Hello, Steve Schmidt? Remember, fun Steve is gone. That's just not how this campaign is making its decisions right now.

All of this is conjecture, of course. But in considering why this plum media get was neatly wrapped up and hand-delivered to Gibson with a bow, they all seem pretty reasonable. One thing is for sure: The ratings are going to be ginormous. Everyone hanging on the edge of this newest dramatic turn in the campaign will be tuning in to see what the heck she actually says. What the heck he actually asks...well, that's up to him.

Comments

[Riverish]

Amusing to read the comments here re: Gibson. He's either blatantly for the GOP or not, according to your commenters. I worked with him for over 15 years and still don't know his politics. That's how real journos conduct themselves. And as noted elsewhere, he knows more about the world than most of our politicians, certainly more than Ms. Palin.

[shelleyjayt]

Charlie Gibson Should Have His Journalism Credentials Revoked

When conducting the ONE interview Palin has granted the media, Charlie Gibson had an awesome responsibility to the country as a whole to ask Sarah Palin some tough questions.

He failed miserably.

He did not press her on the abuse question and ear marks. If there is no abuse, then why did Alaska received more ear marks per capita than any other state?

He did not press her on the fact that her economic reform is not different than the Bush economic policy.

He did not ask her about sexism and her comments accusing Hillary Clinton of "whining."

He did not ask her to explain why she signed an amendment banning gay marriage in Alaska if she doesn"t judge gay people.

Instead he strolled through her high school and gazed at her basketball trophies.

He is an embarrassment to journalism.

[Wiredwilly]

Same reason it was a bogus ABC poll that is trying to convince everyone the Polls are close when everyone knows Obama is light years ahead, so when the election arrives the Neocons can rig a few Voting machines and win easily. If Obama is 70 points ahead they can't pull that one off. ABC is a stooge for the Central Bankers.

[PrinceHal]

"As much as Democrats, angry at Gibson's tough questioning of Barack Obama at the April 16, 2008 debate, may think that [Charlie] was chosen because he was favorable to the GOP, I don't think that was the reason . . . nor do I think Gibson is a GOP shill." --Rachel Sklar

Sorry, Rachel, you're just dead wrong on this one. Gibson is as much a GOP shill as anybody at Fox News, he's just a little more subtle about it. Not a lot more subtle, just a little. Before writing this, you should have spent some time watching Charlie's daily (DAILY!) 6:30 newscast and listening to him manhandle Democrats while boosting George Bush, his administration, his surge, and his preferred successor.

Had you done your homework, you would have noticed that Gibson has always made his newscast available for a prolonged and friendly interview with W whenever it was in the administration's interest. And he has given McCain his very sweetest coverage from git-go. Obama? See if you can find a video of the long, man-eating interview Gibson did with him during his European trip.

I was surprised to hear no loud "Of course!" from other media when Gibson got picked to interview Palin. It's as if nobody watches the evening news, and it's a closely-guarded secret that Gibson and his program are the Bush administration's -- and now McCain's -- obvious outlet of choice whenever they want to put something over on the Great Public.

[kdubbg]

Cabela's is BullSh*t. They use the worst kind of tactics to force local governments to give them special handouts, Often almost total subsidies, so they'll open stores in certain areas to the tune of millions of dollars that could be used for the benefit of everyone. Instead they use these advantages to force out local businesses and undermine the economies of cities they claim to be helping.

They use sham "museum-quality" displays to avoid paying property taxes under certain exemptions.

They also donate heavily to the GOP.

[wingnutslayer]

I'm sure that Charlie will handle her like any other guest on Good Morning America. Gently, with great deference and questions like "Who is Sarah Palin?" and "Tell us what it's like balancing a career and a family" and "What does moose taste like?" It will be such delightful fun. I think I'll make a copy of it for those sleepless nights when I'm up worrying about how I'm going to have to work until I'm 70 or when I keel over at my desk will anyone notice. It should put me to sleep like a safe, secure baby named Truck. Or Snowshoe. Or Lipstick.

[MichaelJoy]

Charlie Gibson seems like a nice man. But all those years on GMA turned him into a coward when it comes to national politics. He's far too conscious of not annoying his interview subjects, so that he can continue getting access. to them.

Ask the tough questions Charlie. Politicians need you more than you need them!

[devere15th]

Its simple

Some telejournalists get the scoop
Others get the poop
Charlie gets to scoop the poop or poop on the scoop

[luckyoldson]

The fact that Sarah Palin, a completely untested and inexperienced politician from a state that has the population of Fort Worth, Texas...can move the polls the way she has, brought out the frenzy we see in Republicans and conservatives in general...tells me the intellectual capacity of America is damn near non-existent.

Try to imagine what our major western allies are thinking right now?

[whcjr46]

Charlie is going to play softball with Gov Palin so don't expect anything substantial to come of of the interview. If Charlie asks some tough questions I for one will be SHOCKED!!!!

[goflo]

Let's see. They're going to walk around her Alaskan city, with its wilderness backdrop, while simueltaneously showing pictures of Sarah as she grew up. Talk about her family. Ask her to "clear" the "media's" outrageous "lies" against her. All the while Charlie will be smiling.

American issues - obviously the country needs to be fixed, she'll say. That's what John and I plan to do, she'll say.

How? - is obviously a question Charlie will not be asking.

[FCorey]

Don't forget...besides strolling around that frighteningly Twilight Zone-ish town, they will exploit that poor baby all over the screen because we had better not forget...

...because she is the mom of a down syndrome baby, a pregnant teen and a drug addict son who was forced into the military (after his convenient 9/11 deployment package) she should also be given the keys to the country.

If Obama doesn't get back to the issues and allow Biden (if he's even interested) to attack this...this...person.

[mellene]

I don't expect any vital questions to be asked. All the major networks can focus on is gossip and entertainment so that's about what the interview will end up being as well.

[RichieTheK]

If we learned anything from the April fiasco in Philadelphia, it"s that all she needs to do is whisper four words into Charlie's hairy ear before the read light come on: capital gains tax cut! He will be instantly smitten.

[richard12345]

NBC, CBS, and ABC, through their news departments, have used the public airways to state politcal views. Even more disturbing, the likes of Katie Couric, Meredith Viera, and others also state their personal political views. Individual Americans do not have access to the public airways to do the same. This would be OK if they were on the same footing as the rest of us. They use the wealth and broadcast rights of the networks, and public airways to tell us their opinions. The rest of us in america do not have the same access to the networks to give our opinions to millions of viewers.

It's the duty of a reporter to report news. If a reporter wants to give an opinion, the reporter should obtain a sponser(s) and get his or her own show. If the reporter desires to give an opinion, the reporter should be required to pay the network for the broadcast time just as any campaign would have to do. This not the case, however. The reporter simply gives an opinion to millions of american voters, and does have to report this "gift" to the candidate he or she supports. I cannot do that and neither can the rest of american citizens. Their should be Federal Rules or Statutes that prohibits these types of "gifts" to candidates with reporting requirements. This will help to take the bias out of the so called "news" and make the playing field level.

[sklfcats]

He got the get cause he is not the interupting type like Meredith or Campbell..

[DaOne]

Get her on MTP, This Week, Face The Naton, FNS, CNN

Have her interviewed by WSJ, WaPo, NYT, Politico

Serve up some "critical thinking required" questions. I want to see what's in that noggin beyond what the campaign tells her to say. Toss out some hypotheticals that require real thinking.