http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg
Let me start by giving background to the video: Palin was asked about her foreign policy experience, and she informed the reporter that she can see Russia from her house. The addition of this extra tidbit of information weakened Palin's ethos in the general political arena. Why? Whether it's true or not, the fact was just not important. Being neighbors with Russia does not add any credibility to Palin's foreign policy experience. In fact, by adding in this detail, Palin comes off as if she believes this adds to her credibility, which makes her come off as if she had nothing better to say. Palin should have considered her words more carefully, knowing she's in the public eye, and is always being carefully scrutinized.
What Palin does do in this interview, however, is use specialized language: "maritime border,""the state that I am the executive of," "trade missions," "national security issues with Russia," "the airspace of the United States." I'm not really sure what any of these phrases mean... But I'm pretty sure they're not used in the right context, or at least they're not explained enough. Palin was nervous, and knew she kind of screwed up by saying she can see Russia from her house, and decided it was time to reassert her credentials. So she used big political terms that the public is unfamiliar with.
Well, Palin kind of lucked out, because this program ran as a CBS Evening News Special. In other words, common people, generally unfamiliar with political jargon, saw this interview. Most people would just assume they don't know what the terms mean, and not realize that they don't exactly make sense in the context in which she uses them. Surely, had Palin been speaking to a group of politicians, her statements would have been discredited by her listeners.
Overall, this clip shows the importance of being careful with which details you include in your speaking, because including an extra detail, even if it's small, can discount your credibility if it's not relevant. Furthermore, this interview with Palin shows how vital it is for a speaker to know their audience, and the rhetorical situation they're stepping into. She (kind of) got away with using political terms out of place, or at least without justification, because her audience was not especially informed on her topic.
One of those phrases you picked out caught my eye, "The state that I am the executive of." Aside from being a grammatical nightmare, it seems to me she used this wording (instead of, you know, "governor") because she was at the time running for an executive office, so she's pretty bluntly hinting at the fact that she has executive experience.
ReplyDeleteI always cringe when I watch this video. She was blatantly nervous and I feel very sorry for her. However, as a politician she should have prepared properly for this interview.
ReplyDeleteI've seen this video at least 6 or 7 times now and it never ceases to amaze me how unprepared yet overconfident Palin is. Flowery language is almost always used in political-speak in an attempt to establish ethos, like you said.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in instances similar to this when it is clear that the speaker has no idea what he or she is talking about, it is completely counter-intuitive. And, with the almighty power of YouTube, it can (and usually does) come back to haunt.