DAVID Shuster, a nodding head, says about Chelsea Clinton: “Doesn’t it seem like she’s being pimped out in some weird sort of way?”
If you were going to pimp out Chelsea, wouldn’t you tart her up a little? Or is hers a trademarked Clinton look, a kink?
It was all no big deal, until MSNBC suspended him, after pressure from the Clinton campaign. So Shuster, instead of seizing the moment of his greatest fame to say something vital, something he has always wanted to say, just grovels:
IN The NY Times: “All Americans should be proud of Chelsea Clinton”?
ONE question: If the Clintons are American royalty, is Chelsea, Princess Anne or Prince Charles?
Posted: 9th, February 2008 | In: Hillary Clinton, Politicians, Race For The White House Comments (3) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- agw on David Haye’s Mouth Takes On Nikolai Valuev’s Hairy Back
- diamondmind on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Steve on Surrey Artist Poos And Wipes Arse On Bible
- Steve on Katie Price And Peter Andre Back Together By Christmas
- vio on Jordy Chandler Killed Michael Jackson In 1993
February 10th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Pimping out is what Ted Kennedy did to Caroline Kennedy when he gave her ass to Obama. Obama then made her walk the line and she had to do the political ads. Pimping out is what Obama did to his wife and daughters when he made them campaign for him.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Pimping out is what Ted Kennedy did to Caroline Kennedy when he gave her ass to Obama. Obama then made her walk the line and she had to do the political ads. Pimping out is what Obama did to his wife and daughters when he made them campaign for him.
February 9th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
It was the time delay between the insult and the apology that will hurt David Shuster and MSNBC, in the exact same way and for the exact same reasons similar delays have damaged other media reputations. The delay (and initial refusal to even acknowledge the mistake) clearly implied that Shuster (like Chris Matthews several weeks earlier) didn’t quite “get it” until MSNBC brass explained it to him. If media personalities want to avoid escalating mistakes like this they should take an immersion program in public relations crisis management — the advice they should follow is pretty straightforward: a proper apology, according to http://www.perfectapology.com, should always include the following:
1. a detailed account of the situation
2. acknowledgement of the hurt or damage done
3. taking responsibility for the situation
4. recognition of your role in the event
5. a statement of regret
6. asking for forgiveness
7. a promise that it won’t happen again
8. a form of restitution whenever possible
Obviously perfect apologies work best when delivered to recipients who are prepared to forgive. But when the aggrieved community sees an opportunity to push the hurt a little further then no apology is likely to be good enough. And that is precisely where we are today — we’re in the midst of a political charged election environment where the primary imperative is not to be reasonable but to search for ways to generate support for your side. When media personalities like MSNBC’s David Shuster or Chris Mathews (or MSNBC’s Don Imus, or Golf Channel’s Kelly Tilghman, etc.) screw up by insulting Chelsea or Hillary (or the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, or Tiger Woods, etc.) even perfect apologies may not work, for perfectly rational political reasons.
The real error in these cases was not the initial mistake but the fact that the best, most sincere and meticulously worded apology was the last one to be issued by those who screwed up. What is so fascinating (and perplexing) about the rising number of failed public apologies over the last few years is that so few public figures (surrounded by public relations advisers) really know how to do it well, or quickly enough.
Peter F. Goolpacy