Truth

Okay, people in the media and those in the public eye: the rule of thumb for anyone who finds themselves with a microphone in front of them or attached to them should be to always assume that it’s on, and that it’s feeding a recording device of some kind or another.

Last week, Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan was the latest public figure to encounter the embarrassment of The Open Mic.  The Open Mic occurs whenever a microphone in a television studio, a boardroom, or on a conference table is left on and connected to a recording device at a period of time during which the person in front of or near the microphone would expect that his or her comments were private and not recorded.  The Open Mic caught George Bush at the G-8 Summit two years ago, when he was heard to suggest to British Prime Minister Tony Blair that the U.N.’s approach to stabilizing the situation between Israel and Hezbollah should be to “get Syria, to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit.”

While this drew knowing chortles of contempt from most Bush critics, it seemed to convey an essential truth about Bush’s view of the situation, which may have been simplistic but at least was unambiguous.  On the other hand, the context of the entire conversation (and conversations before and after) was missing.  Then there was the obvious question of what exactly Mr. Bush might have meant by “shit.”  We don’t know, because he didn’t exactly give a televised address to the nation to (as we’re saying in communication classes here at Syracuse University) “explicate the concept.”

We are quick to jump to conclusions when it comes to our media, authorized or no.  Much was made of Ms. Noonan appearing to say one thing candidly and then contradict herself in her next day’s column.  Her post-firestorm explanation that she attached to the column on the Wall Street Journal website was good enough for me, but that’s because I like her.  “It’s OVER” didn’t mean that she felt the McCain candidacy was dead, but rather that the line of thinking where Republicans assume that its base shares opinions with mainstream American should stop.  Sounds a bit convoluted, I admit, but if you read her column regularly, then read her explanation, it makes sense.

What she seems to find difficult to defend is the use of the word “bullshit,” which describes what she thinks of “political narratives.”  Who among us wouldn’t agree?  The fact is, political narratives are an essential part of elections and always will be, and I would suggest that we perhaps need and want those narratives in order to best make sense of a candidate’s platform.  Ms. Noonan uses the word “bullshit” to indicate her disdain of the tactic; Mike Murphy is the one who calls the choice “cynical.”  At least Ms. Noonan attempts to explicate her concept of bullshit.

Does Ms. Noonan think Sarah Palin is the “most qualified” candidate for V.P.?  Evidently not.  Does she exactly sing Ms. Palin’s praises in her column?  Calling the pick a “Hail Mary” pass is not complimentary.  “Hail Mary” passes are not the most high percentage plays in football.  Ms. Noonan even questions Ms. Palin’s experience when it comes to dealing with the brutal public arena of high stakes politics.

So what was all the hubbub about?

Partisans seeking advantage, I don’t know.  Perhaps I just have too big of a sense of fairness.  Perhaps it’s because I have an understanding of the way television studios and microphones and recording equipment work that I know just how out of context these recordings can be taken.  The camera, or in this case, microphone, does lie.  All the bloggers in the world can speculate on how well these kinds of snippets convey truth, but in reality, they do not, and cannot.