Now Oprah Needs Palin

In September 2008, Oprah Winfrey was the reigning queen of daytime TV chatter. She flatly said no to any talk about then Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin gracing her set. Oprah made no effort to square having then presidential candidate Obama on her show twice with her cold shoulder of Palin, a woman who made history in her own right by being the first female GOP VP pick and who seemed like a natural for Oprah's show. And since half of her female audience didn't and don't share Oprah's politics, they liked it even less that Oprah was Obama's top TV cheerleader. But Oprah was unfazed by the rage she got from many women at ditching Palin. Her attitude was it's my show and I'll do what I want with it and I'll invite who I want on the show.

Oprah didn't need Palin to make her, her show, or ratings. Now, however, it's a different story. Though she's still the reigning queen of daytime TV talk and there are millions who wouldn't dream of ending their day without Oprah, her ratings have plunged. The estimated seven million who view her show is about half of of the number that watched it a decade ago. She's even negotiating to move her show to cable in a couple of years. That's wise; bailing from network TV while the money and her name and allure are still there. The relentless war for ratings makes Palin a hot property, and her much buzzed book, Going Rogue, is the hook for the interview.

But there's another reason that Oprah needs to pay back door homage to Palin. Though it sticks in the craw of millions of Palin loathers to admit it, she has a following, a big, and impassioned one. She has greater national political name recognition than any other Republican except McCain. She energizes and rallies conservatives, and polls say far more Americans self-identify themselves as conservatives than liberals, let alone progressives. Palin's motherly, family-values, fundamentalist pitch fascinates even those who personally disdain her. This includes much of the Palin obsessed media. Her political ineptness, naivete smacks of a bumbling political innocence that far from being a liability endears her to throngs. This has made her a hot ticket item on the media and on the lecture circuit.

GOP regulars and political pundits routinely laugh her off as a possible GOP presidential candidate in 2012. She's still a favored running joke of late night comics. But this has endeared her to many as a scorned mother non-politician, and that serves to keep her public stock and appeal high.

The irresistible mix of Palin fascination and the sensationalism attached to it draws Oprah to her. Oprah hopes this formula will help push her numbers up. Still-fresh memories that Oprah did what she'd never done before -- not only endorse a presidential candidate, but crusade for him -- makes the Palin-Oprah talk duet even more tantalizing. Oprah will meticulously observe political decorum with Palin and not mention her unshaken Obama bias. Palin's appearance is billed simply as a talk about her book. But the Oprah-Obama connect will hang heavy in the set air. That's terrific for ratings; ratings that Oprah can use. Oprah needs Palin for that.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book, How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge (Middle Passage Press) will be released in January 2010.

 

Comments

[chancefavors]

Now Oprah Needs Palin

I disagree

[abbienormal]

But really, will one show with Palin really raise long-term ratings? I don't know anything about how these bumps in ratings affect anything, but I cannot believe that it is going to convince women to continue to watch beyond this one show.

Inform me.

[bnww]

Sorry, buddy, Palin needs Oprah. I can assure you it is NOT the other way around.

[eva belle]

So is Palin feeling sorry for Oprah? Wants to boost her ratings too? See Oprah has a low self image, init?

[Motherunit]

So, you think maybe Sarah "feels sorry for" Oprah, and that's why she's doing the show? She's big-hearted like that. I'm hoping she takes pity on Jon Stewart soon. I would pay big money to see that interview.

[Eris23]

Sarah Palin is nothing but a tabloid story at this point trying to make money based on her perceived celebrity. Oprah needs her about as badly as she needs Lindsay Lohan.

[Politihal]

In my book, A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows, I address the issue of Oprah's support of Barack Obama and that many women felt abandoned by Oprah when she chose to support Obama over the first viable woman presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. It was women, after all, who helped Oprah build her brand. So it is no surprise that women abandoned Oprah since she 'abandoned' them first. It makes sense that Oprah would return to women to regain her audience. On the other hand, it will be interesting to see how Oprah treated Sarah Palin during the interview. Let's hope it was with respect. Still, the interview that I am waiting for is the Oprah-Hillary confrontation. If Oprah wants to fully regain her audience, the woman she needs most on her show is not Sarah Palin but Hillary Clinton. 2012?

Halli Casser-Jayne

[Cakey4814]

Oh I get it..it's okay to support Hillary because you're a woman and she's the first "viable" woman candidate but if you're Black and you wanted to support President Obama because he was the first "viable Black candidate you got raked over the coals. Oprah doesn't need Sarah nor Hillary; that's just your wistful thinking..­2012...yea­h right..

[bellenoir55]

Co-sign,Cakey 4814!

[Politihal]

The obvious answer is that is it wasn't Black women who made Oprah, but women. Then the question is: Do you see yourself as a woman or a Black woman? Personally, I see myself as a woman. I don't define myself by the color of my skin or by my religious preference or sexual orientation. Those are aspects of me. You?

[eshalom]

Umm, I think it was the other way around. About 90% of African-American voters supported Obama while simultaneously accusing women of supporting Hillary due to gender. Jesse Jackson, Jr. was frothing at the mouth when Hillary won New Hamsphire and was videotaped making his ugly sexist comments. On the News Hour that Friday, so-called liberal Mark Shields said bluntly, "She won on the basis of gender."

[Melissa]

The more I see Hillary the sadder I am that she did not win. She is doing a wonderful job. The press was brutal to both Hillary and Sarah and I am thrilled that they are both doing very well. I wouldn't watch Oprah no matter who she has on.

[Healthwatch2010]

Oprah is her OWN person and should have the right and AUDACITY to vote for whom ever she wants. Obviously, Oprah thought Barack Obama was the best PERSON for the job and she supported him in a BIG way. Oprah is an extremely wise woman and can see the Big picture ahead, her detractors should get over her choice for POTUS...an­d challenge the wingnuts who are tearing this country apart.

[Yinka Daniel - Elebute]

So much comments have been made about Sarah Palin, the erstwhile GOP VP candidate and her "fitness" as a Presidential candidate in 2012. We cannot easily leave out the fact that despite her seemingly inadequacies about her knowledge of foreign policies, economics etc, she still attracts some sizable proportion of followers. If she is the best GOP can offer as their flagbearer in 2012, then GOP has a long way to go. She still needs proper tutoring on how to capture the imaginations of the public by acquiring current and adequate information on economic, security, health etc and proferring best solutions that has no semblance of naivety on her part.

Her present profile via her latest output "Going Rogue" could perhaps put her in better light than previously envisaged. The candour she presents can still be worked upon, for her to be accepted more widely. I wish her the best in her future endeavours though I'm not a fan of hers.

[Elrancho2]

You make a good argument but I can't help wondering if it's really all about ratings and not more a case of curiosity for Oprah. I think that even though she probably loathes Palin and everything she represents, Oprah perhaps has an almost 'morbid' desire to interview her face to face and reveal a side to Palin that other interviewers simply would not expose. Surely, Oprah doesn't need to prove anything to anyone anymore - and as someone else said here, would one day's boosted ratings really make that much difference? I won't be watching (just the sight of Palin is enough to turn my stomach) but I will be interested to hear others report.

[PaleMail]

Palin is now promoting her book, nothing more nothing less. Palin needs Oprah not the other way around.

[Serene99]

As someone who has their DVR set to tape Oprah every single weekday, and has for many years, it might interest the blogger to note that I have cancelled today's taping of the show with Palin. I simply cannot stand another second of Palin, so Oprah will have to do without me this afternoon.

[Owlygirl]

Oprah's ego is heavily invested in her show and her ratings. She's not immune from being human or a business person. Regardless of what her supporters have to say her people are in semi-crisis mode about the drop in ratings. They matter with regard to advertisers and, yes, how the public feels about the once omnipotent Oprah. I have no problem with this being pointed out by the writer. In fact I appreciate his honesty. He did with tact and clarity. So lay down your slings and let's have an honest disussion. Yeesh. They're still possible - yes?

[clevelandchick]

The blogger's piece here is based on the premise that Oprah didn't have poor widdle Sarah on because she didn't like her. But, Oprah did not have Obama on after 2006, before he announced his candidacy. Oprah didn't have ANY of the candidates­..for prez or VP...on her show during the campaign.

Since he starts out with a false or disingenuous premise and bothers to continue his poorly conceived piece earns him every arrow slung his way. You can't be disingenuous with "clarity or tact"....b­ecause it's lying.

[vandegrasse]

So Palin will rescue Oprah. Doesn't seem likely.

[indy girl]

She certainly didn't rescue John McCain!

[clevelandchick]

LOL!

[idtt]

I think you needed that headline more than Oprah needed Mrs. Palin. It's amazing how you're able to shape reality to the story you wanted to tell. Long before anyone in the lower 48 had ever heard of the Alaskan Governor, Oprah said she would not let any politicians on her show, including the Obamas. I would think if it were about ratings for Ms Winfrey, she'd get more by having Michelle Obama on her show. Has she even been on since the election?

[Margo Arrowsmith]

Oh for God's sake, 10 years ago no one had the competition that there is today. There weren't as many stations as many shows and few people had DVR. I would think that everyone's ratings are down.

However, given what you say, I expect that soon Sarah will be saying that she did the show because she pitied Oprah. And Sarah's base will believe it!

http://www.squidoo.com/debbie-wasserman-schultz

[clevelandchick]

Right on Margo. This guy must think we're all idiots. As does Palin...bu­t at least when it comes to her fans, lucky for her they are.