Monday, June 6, 2011

Shameless Self-Promotion: Chauncey DeVega on the Ed Schultz Radio Show Discussing How the Tea Party GOP is Rewriting History



One more clip to share. I like seeing WARN's name under my own. It feels right. I also must thank all of you folks for making that happen as this project was supposed to be a fun distraction, not something that would get any sort of attention at all. And as always, please share any and all suggestions.

On first listen a few weeks back, I felt this interview did not go well. The topic was slightly different than what I expected. Once I got into my groove I had to talk a bit faster than I prefer. Now, in hindsight, and watching the interview with the visuals, it was not too bad.

For those venturing into the talking head game I have learned quite a bit this last year. As you know I was a radio host for many years. But, being the one who asks is not the same as he/she who responds. A lesson for fellow travelers: have a game plan and a few talking points, yet be ready to shift quickly.
Thank you for indulging me my sharing. I get better at what I do precisely because of your feedback and honesty. There are some things going down this week that may pay off, keep me in your thoughts and the party will keep on...

8 comments:

Oh Crap said...

Very timely, considering this week's Palin venture into stupidity: insisting Paul Revere warned the British about British troop movements. LOL!

I was on Twitter earlier this morning when it broke that the idiot conservatives were running to Wikipedia and Conservopedia to alter the Revere entries to reflect it.

I thought you sounded great on Pap - I missed it the first time around. I didn't hear any too-fast talking.

Oh Crap said...

Ugh, meant to say on Twitter yesterday morning.

Today, Washington Post has picked it up. http://wapo.st/io6ZXx.

Supporters of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin have taken to Wikipedia, where they have been trying all weekend to revise the page on Paul Revere to reflect her recent comments.

In her trip to Massachusetts last week, Palin flubbed the history of Revere’s ride, saying that he rode through Boston ringing bells to warn the British that the revolutionaries were armed and ready to fight. Revere actually rode quietly, to warn the revolutionaries that British troops were headed their way.

As first noticed by the blog Little Green Footballs, Palin fans have been attempting to add her version of the story to Revere’s Wikipedia page — a source of research information for more than half of college students. Other users have been deleting the changes as they appear, arguing that what Palin said in the past week should be kept separate from a page about an event that happened hundreds of years ago.

It's funny, though, we were kicking it around long before LGF posted on it. Anyway, doesn't matter. This is conservatism.

chaunceydevega said...

@OhCrap. Don't forget. The truth isn't real. It is manufactured.

Constructive Feedback said...

Mr DeVega:

Do you find it strange that you are more motivated to focus on Sarah Palin and the Tea Parties than you are about the Black Unemployment rate situation that Friday's job report had on our people's fiscal condition?

Is it fair for someone who is observing you to distill from these proclivities of yours a sense about what you VALUE in greater proportions?

dr. becky said...

Kudos, Chauncey. It was a tad fast, but not so much that I could not follow you or found the pace distracting.

I had my first radio interview experience this year and was amazed at how the host tried to consistently steer me "off message" and away from my talking points. I am learning much from following you...

chaunceydevega said...

@Dr.Becky. So kind. Whatever you do, don't mess up like me! Transcend! What was the interview on? One of the tricks is learning how to be polite while redirecting the host...I am working on some rhetorical strategies to that end myself.

Oh Crap said...

Poor CF.

Couldn't hear the flute or the big trombone, tsk-tsk.

dr. becky said...

I was being interviewed on public radio about the graphic warning labels on cigarette packages that have just been introduced (new and improved) in Canada and the US. As you might imagine smoking is very divisive issue with little room for considering what I refer the 'unintended consequences'of such visually arresting imagery. The host basically attacked me from the get go and seemed to suggest that I was pro-smoking, simply because I raised some conerns about the potentially disempoweing ways that smokers are portrayed.

As an aside, my university offers media training through the PR department and I have found this to be very helpful in preparing.