2 ms·

they failed to answer the question, instead answering a different question, one that wasn't asked. Politicians do this all the time. Constantly. They do it b

they failed to answer the question, instead answering a different question, one that wasn't asked. Politicians do this all the time. Constantly. They do it because the PR firms taught them to do this, and those same PR people work for tech companies now. (It's awful that journalists these days let politicians get away with it. When I went to journalism school, we would get a failing grade if we allowed an interview subject to dodge a question like that, but that's a rant for another day.)

frankfrankfrank 4y ago
[flagged]
nrook 4y ago
There's a funny passage in one of Al Franken's books about this. Franken was a comedian who ran for the U.S. Senate and was successfully elected. (He later escaped in celestial disgrace, but that's unrelated.) He talks about how he was trained to do this by his PR folks, thought it was stupid, tried it out in a few interviews to get them off his back, and then was amazed that it worked every time.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  The documentary "Thank You For Smoking" illustrates this.
ajsnigrutin 4y ago
There was a funny video just about this not that long ago regarding housing prices in canda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5ExYQ21sGY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5ExYQ21sGY The sad part is, that the politician asking the question does a better job that most journalists and points at the absurdity of the dodged answers.
- chrismorgan 4y ago
  Yet it’s all still deeply impersonal. I would have thought it would be much more effective for the one whose questions are being rudely ignored to deliberately make it personal in response: to bluntly impugn the honour and integrity of the other, politely offering grave insult to match the insult received by the ignoring of the question—the sort of thing that would probably have led to a duel in bygone ages. (I wonder if such bodies have any specific rules against referring to someone as “the dishonourable minister” or similar, or anything about means of address in general.)

frankfrankfrank 4y ago

[flagged]

nrook 4y ago

There's a funny passage in one of Al Franken's books about this. Franken was a comedian who ran for the U.S. Senate and was successfully elected. (He later escaped in celestial disgrace, but that's unrelated.) He talks about how he was trained to do this by his PR folks, thought it was stupid, tried it out in a few interviews to get them off his back, and then was amazed that it worked every time.

hgsgm 4y ago
The documentary "Thank You For Smoking" illustrates this.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

There was a funny video just about this not that long ago regarding housing prices in canda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5ExYQ21sGY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5ExYQ21sGY The sad part is, that the politician asking the question does a better job that most journalists and points at the absurdity of the dodged answers.

chrismorgan 4y ago
Yet it’s all still deeply impersonal. I would have thought it would be much more effective for the one whose questions are being rudely ignored to deliberately make it personal in response: to bluntly impugn the honour and integrity of the other, politely offering grave insult to match the insult received by the ignoring of the question—the sort of thing that would probably have led to a duel in bygone ages. (I wonder if such bodies have any specific rules against referring to someone as “the dishonourable minister” or similar, or anything about means of address in general.)