| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Oprah & The Governor |
| 2008-09-06 |
| Jonah Goldberg I think Peter and others are right that Oprah's reported refusal to have Governor Palin on her show will be much discussed and may indeed cause headaches of one kind or another for Oprah. I even think Oprah should have her on for this or that reason. But none of my reasons rise to the level of civics, ethics, "fairness" or anything like that. Oprah's a private citizen, albeit a very public one. She&'s not the host of Meet the Press or even the host of Hardball. She's the queen of daytime TV or some other cliche. She's under no obligation to have anyone on her show she doesn't want to. I think it might be good for Winfrey, Palin and/or the country. Or it might not be. I agree that Gov. Palin seems like a perfectly natural fit for the show personality-wise. But at the end of the day she's a governor and vice presidential nominee. Oprah is an infotainment diva or some such. But some of the readers emailing me about this seem to think there should be more outrage about this. Outrage? About what? I'm far from a "who am I to judge" guy, but what standing do we have to express outrage over the fact that she's making a poor business decision or acting on her political preferences. I'm no more outraged that Oprah won't have the governor on her show than I would be if Brit Hume refused to interview the Dog Whisperer. Update: A reader makes this excellent point: Jonah: And, Abe Greenwald makes a case for Oprah's hypocrisy, which I must say I don't find very persuasive. It rests on the fact that Oprah has done a show(s) on special needs parenting and Down syndrome kids and whatnot. He goes on to say that Palin would make a perfect guest to further explore that theme. I agree absolutely. But I am at a complete loss why she has to do it before the election. Indeed, one could argue that trying to browbeat Oprah into having Palin on before the election approaches saying, "Oprah, you must let Palin use her baby as a political issue." Again, I agree Oprah should have Palin on, but I don't see why she should be bullied -- or we should be outraged by her refusal -- to lend support to a politician she doesn't support. Indeed, Winfrey issued this a statement which says, in part, "I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over." I think it would have been better for Oprah business-wise if she'd stayed out of the election entirely and just had everyone on. I think that would have been better for the country too. But it's her show. And I still don't see why I should be outraged by any of this. Intrigued? Yes. Curious? Yes. Outraged, Nope. |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #1 Well Oprah, Governor Palin may not have time for you after she is elected. After all, she will most likely be too busy with the affairs of state. Oprah didn't mind hyping Barack Hussein Obama for President early on. Well, I can see O'Reilly make BO squirm with hard questions he can't answer. Besides, Oprah would probably ask soft ball questions of BO about how he feels about his tie. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2008-09-06 14:46 |