Gotcha Questions

[toasty]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMNHgJH2680[/YOUTUBE]

Is it just me, or has "gotcha journalism" been broadened to include pretty much any question that Sarah Palin doesn't know the answer to (which is pretty much any question at all)? The question was not, "Name the leader of Pakistan," which is the sort of question you would assume someone running for VP would know, so if she doesn't, she looks foolish. She was asked what to do about Pakistan, which is open ended and hardly a "gotcha" question, unless the questioner knows you have no fucking idea what to do about Pakistan.

More troubling, though, is the protectionist stance McCain takes with Palin -- cutting her off to jump in and answer a question for her, etc. She's not your 12 year old daughter, John, she's running for the second highest office in the land, and she better damn well be able to answer a simple question on her own.

[sammwalk]

Re: Gotcha Questions

McCain refers to this being a case of people taking the quote out of "the context of the conversation". Bullshit. This is no subtle point: John McCain does not want to go into Pakistan without the authorization of the Pakistani government, whereas Barack Obama has said that he would in fact allow the military to strike inside Pakistan if it would mean that we would be eliminating significant Al Quaeda targets. Both positions are defensible but that's not the issue. The issue is what Sarah Palin just said:

Palin was questioned by a Temple graduate student about whether the U.S. should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should."

What's unclear about this? How is context important here?

[Jenks]

Re: Gotcha Questions

i suppose this is a "gotcha question" too:

Couric: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?

Palin: I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.

Couric: What, specifically?

Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.

Couric: Can you name a few?

Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

How about just answer the fking question. You can't come up with one?

[toasty]

Re: Gotcha Questions

How about just answer the fking question. You can't come up with one?

seriously. just name your local paper, ffs, if nothing else. say SOMETHING...

[Miroslav]

Re: Gotcha Questions

Let's face it: for Palin, every question is a "gotcha question."

[Steve Graham]

Re: Gotcha Questions

my god, they're like a comedic duo.. and his mannerisms when she is speaking is very telling, he is almost cringing at the thought of what she may say.. at points he looked as if he was going to slam his hand over her mouth so she would stop talking, lol

[sammwalk]

Re: Gotcha Questions

^^exactly my same feeling!

[Mad'Em Fixer]

Re: Gotcha Questions

i suppose this is a "gotcha question" too:



How about just answer the fking question. You can't come up with one?

The problem is she does not understand most of the questions she has been asked recently!

[Cj Tari]

Re: Gotcha Questions

so everytime shes not able to answer a question that means its a gotcha question?!?!

riiiiight.

[88Mariner]

Re: Gotcha Questions

so everytime shes not able to answer a question that means its a gotcha question?!?!

riiiiight.

(Mariner, J.)
Construing the term 'gotcha question' in its plain meaning and understanding illustrates that it is a quesiton posed to another to ellicit an unprepared reaction or to demonstrate that the person does not know the answer to the question. Furthermore, a conditional element of a gotcha question requires that the questioner does in fact know that the other person will likely falter in answering or would not know the answer 1) that the questioner has acquired knowledge that the other party would not know the answer or would falter in answer, 2) that the nature of the quesiton itself is malicious to effectuate the intended outcome of embarassment or other similar harm. On the facts, Katie Couric was not asking a question to cause Palin to falter, but instead, gave her an opportunity to explain herself further to communicate her understanding of the military border affairs on the Afghan/Paki border. It is not presumed that Katie knew how Palin would answer, which was, circularly, the reason why she had asked it. As it appears, the nature of the question was for clarification purposes apropos a previous statement Palin made and which was contrary to what her running mate has asserted, and which was more in accord with her opponent and the sitting President. Embarrasment was not created here, as it had been created by the previous gaffe. To the contrary, this was an opportunity to amend and clarify her statements, not to trip her up. While the dissent will likely say that this did create further embarassment, the Majority here distinguishes between a reasonable prudent vice presidential candidate and that of an ill-informed unprepared and jittery one. The former would have been capable of fielding such a question; the latter, clearly not. The distinction, thus, is that one cannot embarrass a person who is highly susceptible to embarassment through ill-preparation and other self-serving denial; otherwise all questions directed at that party would be construed as 'gotcha questions' even where there is sincerity in asking and no prior knowledge that would incline such ill-will to ask such a question. A question posed does not reactively become a 'gotcha question' by being bounced off the cognitive skills of an imbecile. It must be a 'gotcha question' before it is understood, conceptualized, and heard by the other party. Assuming arguendo that Couric did have prior knowledge of how Palin would field the question, and assuming arguendo that she intended to effectuate a bumbling response, the banality of the question itself, combined with the apparent opportunity to clarify, and that such a question should not be unexpected in light of such gaffes, combined, strongly overcome the presumption of an intended 'gotcha question'. We hold that the question was not a gotcha question and, under the facts, could not abstractly be construed as one. Still, to hold otherwise, would require all questioning of Palin to cease. In lieu of her status as a public person running for political office, this court would not burden the people of the United States with such an onerous task of piecing together scraps of information in order to construct an informed opinon about Palin.

[toasty]

Re: Gotcha Questions

^^back AWAY from the law books...

[shosh]

Re: Gotcha Questions

(Mariner, J.)
Construing the term 'gotcha question' in its plain meaning and understanding illustrates that it is a quesiton posed to another to ellicit an unprepared reaction or to demonstrate that the person does not know the answer to the question. Furthermore, a conditional element of a gotcha question requires that the questioner does in fact know that the other person will likely falter in answering or would not know the answer 1) that the questioner has acquired knowledge that the other party would not know the answer or would falter in answer, 2) that the nature of the quesiton itself is malicious to effectuate the intended outcome of embarassment or other similar harm. On the facts, Katie Couric was not asking a question to cause Palin to falter, but instead, gave her an opportunity to explain herself further to communicate her understanding of the military border affairs on the Afghan/Paki border. It is not presumed that Katie knew how Palin would answer, which was, circularly, the reason why she had asked it. As it appears, the nature of the question was for clarification purposes apropos a previous statement Palin made and which was contrary to what her running mate has asserted, and which was more in accord with her opponent and the sitting President. Embarrasment was not created here, as it had been created by the previous gaffe. To the contrary, this was an opportunity to amend and clarify her statements, not to trip her up. While the dissent will likely say that this did create further embarassment, the Majority here distinguishes between a reasonable prudent vice presidential candidate and that of an ill-informed unprepared and jittery one. The former would have been capable of fielding such a question; the latter, clearly not. The distinction, thus, is that one cannot embarrass a person who is highly susceptible to embarassment through ill-preparation and other self-serving denial; otherwise all questions directed at that party would be construed as 'gotcha questions' even where there is sincerity in asking and no prior knowledge that would incline such ill-will to ask such a question. A question posed does not reactively become a 'gotcha question' by being bounced off the cognitive skills of an imbecile. It must be a 'gotcha question' before it is understood, conceptualized, and heard by the other party. Assuming arguendo that Couric did have prior knowledge of how Palin would field the question, and assuming arguendo that she intended to effectuate a bumbling response, the banality of the question itself, combined with the apparent opportunity to clarify, and that such a question should not be unexpected in light of such gaffes, combined, strongly overcome the presumption of an intended 'gotcha question'. We hold that the question was not a gotcha question and, under the facts, could not abstractly be construed as one. Still, to hold otherwise, would require all questioning of Palin to cease. In lieu of her status as a public person running for political office, this court would not burden the people of the United States with such an onerous task of piecing together scraps of information in order to construct an informed opinon about Palin.

[88Mariner]

Re: Gotcha Questions

lol wat?

cliff notes?

cliff notes: couric's questions were not gotcha questions on thier own, but rather, they were gotcha questions by the character and quality of the person who they were directed to.

apologies for putting you through that. i spent all day reading opinions (strangely worded ones) on an arbitration that i'm preparing for tomorrow, and wanted to take a break and blow off some steam but keep my mind focused.

[shosh]

Re: Gotcha Questions

cliff notes: couric's questions were not gotcha questions on thier own, but rather, they were gotcha questions by the character and quality of the person who they were directed to.

apologies for putting you through that. i spent all day reading opinions (strangely worded ones) on an arbitration that i'm preparing for tomorrow, and wanted to take a break and blow off some steam but keep my mind focused.

i was jk dude. i actually read all that. i was just giving you a hard time