Arnold Grabs ABC's Shipman, Demands: Stop Spinning Fire Coverage
By Scott Whitlock | October 24, 2007 - 12:42 ET
Reporter Claire Shipman did her level best to get California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to admit that the efforts to combat the state's wild fires were going poorly. Shipman interviewed the governor on Wednesday's "Good Morning America" and wondered about "the comparison to Katrina that everybody's making in the back of their mind..." At one point, Governor Schwarzenegger cut off Shipman's pleas for negative assessments of the effort by grabbing her arm. He bluntly scolded, "Trust me when I tell you, you're looking for a mistake and you won't find it because it's all good news, as much as you maybe hate it, but it's good news."
Earlier, the ABC correspondent attempted to deflate Schwarzenegger's sunny optimism by mentioning unnamed officials in Orange County who asserted the state doesn't have enough resources, including firefighting aircraft. The former actor simply wouldn't go along with this premise of victimization. He firmly retorted, "Anyone that is complaining about the planes, just wants to complain because it's a bunch of nonsense." Schwarzenegger then proceeded to point out that the state has 90 planes and only wind has hampered their use.
Shipman also spun President Bush's planned visit on Thursday as a bad thing. She noted how the governor "remained upbeat" about the trip. Later, somewhat incredulously, the ABC reporter stated that Schwarzenegger "actively encouraged" the visit and that "...despite the disruption this presidential visit will cause tomorrow, it will keep the federal government and all of its resources focused on California, ideally hoping to stave off any Katrina-like situations." However, as a September 1, 2005 CyberAlert noted, "Good Morning America" anchor Diane Sawyer grilled President Bush for not being proactive in terms of dealing with Hurricane Katrina.. In addition to several other left-leaning questions, he asked him, "When are you going to go?"
A transcript of the October 24 segment, which aired at 7:07am, follows:
DIANE SAWYER: Of course, the man in charge of the battle against nature is Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. And ABC's senior national correspondent Claire Shipman talked one-on-one with the governor and has that exclusive interview. Claire?
CLAIRE SHIPMAN: Diane, this is a governor who is always up, who never betrays a hint of worry. And so, characteristically, even after visiting the front lines of these devastating fires, after coming here to see the evacuees, he was relentlessly insistent that the effort is going well. The spotlight squarely on the governor as he navigates California’s biggest crisis on his watch.
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER: We have to do everything we can to protect the people and protect the property.
SHIPMAN: Relentlessly delivering the same message around devastating parts of the state.
SCHWARZENEGGER: You should know you're not out there by yourself fighting these fires, that the state is there to help you.
SHIPMAN: We caught up with him for an exclusive one-on-one at the makeshift evacuee camp at the Qualcomm Stadium. His optimistic demeanor going full tilt.
SCHWARZENEGGER: And then when you think about it, I have declared a state of emergency in the seven counties and then we requested it from the federal government and within a day they came through and within a day they came through. So, I mean, that's quick action! Really, I've never seen that before.
SHIPMAN: So, you think the comparison to Katrina that everybody's making in the back of their mind these days is a good one in terms of state and federal.
SCHWARZENEGGER: All you have to do is just look around here and see how happy people are. No one is screaming. No one is complaining about anything.
SHIPMAN: Well, you're saying everybody's working together, but you have heard there have been some complaints from officials. For example, in Orange County who say, 'If we'd only had more resources earlier, more planes, more firefighting resources, we might have been able to head off the fires ravaging Orange County right now.'
SCHWARZENEGGER: Anyone that is complaining about the planes just wants to complain because it's a bunch of nonsense. The fact is that we have all the planes in the world here. We have 90 aircraft here and they can't fly because of the wind situation.
SHIPMAN: At one point, he even employed a heavy weight grip to make his case. The point he was making, you have to be ready to fly --
[Schwarzenegger grips Shipman's arm and starts vigorously shaking it.]
SCHWARZENEGGER: Trust me when I tell you, you're looking for a mistake and you won't find it because it's all good news, as much as you maybe hate it, but it's good news. Trust me, okay?
SHIPMAN: I don't hate it. I'm just listening to Orange County.
SCHWARZENEGGER: No, no. I'm just telling you-- No, but you're--
SHIPMAN: When we agreed to move on to another subject, the President's plans to visit California Thursday, the governor remained upbeat.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Whenever the president shows interest in our fires--
SHIPMAN: You take it --
SCHWARZENEGGER: --and wants to help, you know, the federal government has a lot of help ready for us. We want to utilize that help.
SHIPMAN: So the governor is positive, but practical. He actively encouraged President Bush to come out here as soon as possible. He knows that despite the disruption this presidential visit will cause tomorrow, it will keep the federal government and all of its resources focused on California, ideally hoping to stave off any Katrina-like situations.
-- Modified on 10/24/2007 1:17:11 PM
not suck up to any politician.
Second, I can't imagine why ANYBODY would be skeptical of any politician. Everything they claim always comes true. So media should just print the press releases, I guess.
That said, it seems to be handled better than the Cedar fires, and the experience may be the difference. What's more, Schwartzenegger is turning out to be a half-assed sensible fellow, which is probably why the GOP is down on him - he's not nearly crazy enough.
edtiorial boards offer opinion
no wonder our media is so fucked up.
all of them are in it together, trying to please the customer.
Nobody has any right to expect that any reporter is going to take their word for anything. Certain groups might be reasonably suspected of bullshit, and a politician is not the very first person I would recommend anybody take at his word.
If they really have a problem with it, they don't HAVE to talk to ANYBODY.
into their own political agenda it becomes propaganda....
not that leftwingers are shy about propaganda...
-- Modified on 10/24/2007 7:04:06 PM
their jobs. So you don't want to hear the dialogue, don't buy the paper, put them out of business, then they will adjust their tune.
For myself, I don't give a shit what questions are asked. What I want to hear is the answers. Not that I will believe them, but I regard them as admissions against the speakers' interest.
I just don't see that the media is responsible for making anybody feel good. That is not the reason my dad buys the paper. He buys for information, and understands that information may not be what eh wants to hear.
are you infering that there is no harm in the press becoming an arm of the government? or simply that bush hating sells...
my grandfamily in Czechoslovakia would disagree....had they lived past 39'
-- Modified on 10/24/2007 9:24:52 PM
I am arguing precisely the opposite. My Dad doesn't pay for adverts, spam and junk mail. He knows that comes for free, and he throws most of it away.
So when a reporter talks to a politician, we expect hard & critical questions, on the assumption that the politician will explain themselves to their own advantage; and that the dialogue, ie listening to the cross-examination, is going to get as close to the truth as can be.
Crying that somebody is asking Ahnold hard questions, that they are "merchants of misery" is BS. That's their function, to ask critical questions. I can get the adverts for free.
well, we'll see what kind of standard Claire Shipman sets when she poses her "hard questions" to say, Hillary, won't we?
Cropped image of what first appeared in the Nazi party newspaper Völkischer Beobachter, ostensibly depicting a Sudeten German woman in Asch crying tears of joy when Hitler crossed the border in 1938. Allied propaganda later used the cropped image with other interpretations.
-- Modified on 10/24/2007 9:35:53 PM
equating which one - Shipman or Hillary - to Nazis?
You don't seem to understand that it's not about a particular reporter, or all reporters, or expecting anybody to tell the truth - it's about collecting datat.
If Ahnald shat bull, he would be caught soon enough. A reporter asking nasty questions is not a problem. A reporter asking easy questions is a fucking waste of time.
I don't know what it is with you people always confusing the messenger with the message.
So the fuck what difference does it make if a particular reporter is prejudiced as hell? As long as they get the record straight.
What bothers the hell out of me is people like Coulter and the religious right talking as if they truly believe that the fact does not matter, only adhering to the labelled result does. Eg, that any criticism of Bush is "hatred" of Bush. Where the fuck does *that* come from? The only logical explanation i can imagine is that anything less than sucking GOP ass is regarded as treason.
what matters is that somebody asks the questions, so that we hear the explanation and sift out who can do the job.
If a person can explain what's going on, they might do the job. If they can't explain, how can they do the job?
The idea that a reporter is nice or nasty as a measure of truth or loyalty is as plain stupid as being afraid of the mail.
You guys never seem to understand that information is neutral; it's the FACT that bites your ass. You NEED the person that tells you what's going on, so that you can identify and eliminate the fuckups. Shit on the messengers, and you're going to end up running around blind.
-- Modified on 10/25/2007 8:08:05 AM
"""So the fuck what difference does it make if a particular reporter is prejudiced as hell? As long as they get the record straight."""
The point is, the record was not going the way the reporter's bias wanted it to go, so she pressed for a different set of answers.
Any 10th grader can see the problem with that.
You just need to sit back and learn..
Let the messenger pull shit out of their ass and call it data, you still attract flies.
"""Shit on the messengers, and you're going to end up running around blind."""
Tell that to the "faux news" crowd here, or contradict yourself...either one.
He's so fucking stupid he admits it - and his followers are so fucking stupid they don't see anything wrong with it.
I know you didn't type that with a straight face, you who defend Rush, Faux news et al - it must have taken you hours to calm down from laughing so hard to be able to type that!
-- Modified on 10/25/2007 10:56:38 AM
I think the questions and statements were in fair territory, and the governor handled them badly. Of course people are going to have Katina on their mind here. Any governor pointing to "happy" evacuees should have his sanity questioned. Furthermore, a reporter should check out tips before presenting them as a question. I don't think I would go from rumor to confronting the governor on TV. Of course some people under pressure are going to say things.
Though it's apparent that things are going far better compared to Katrina at every level of government. One major main thing: people actually evacuated. I like that reverse 911 system. If this keeps up, the Republicans will screw themselves and show that the government actually can do a good job.
I don't think Bush should go around till the disaster is over, frankly.
-- Modified on 10/25/2007 9:19:56 AM
I hear he's got a new codpiece, bigger than the Carrier "I'm a fighterpilot" one.
God, it's great to have a president who l;ikes to play dress up, and just in time for Halloween.
As they are amateurs today, of course they cocked it up.