THE PRESIDENT of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, walked out of a 60 Minutes interview after being asked a question about his wife.
Was he wrong to leave? Was Leslie Stahl wrong to ask questions about the politician's private life? Does the public have the right to know such things about their elected leaders?
Does it change things when you learn that Sarkozy filed for divorce two weeks after the interview?
Should 60 Minutes have aired the video of Sarkozy getting his face powdered? Should they have aired the things he said before the interview actually began?
Should you be offended that Sarkozy said the interview was stupid, that it was a waste of time, and that his press secretary was an imbecile for even scheduling it?
7 years ago
11 comments:
I can certainly understand why he wouldn't want to entertain that kind of questioning. American journalism at the moment is very sensationalized. I think she should have been much more concerned about what France was doing in the global world.
It's not America's business what the marital status of the French President is. Our business is how the politics of France affect us.
Given, Sarkozy was acting pompous and might have deserved that piece about him being "busy" and having a "big job," I think the only reason it was run was because the reporter wasn't good enough at her job to keep him in the interview for long enough.
I think however that our politicians might need to take note--as well as our reporters--of what happened here. Whether or not the French President is divorcing doesn't matter on the same level as our dwindling relationship to France.
I'm kind of ashamed at how silly and petty this journalist made America look. This celebrity culture is not dictating areas of like that they do not belong to.
I despise journalists who do things in the name of "the public." Running around, catching people in driveways insted of setting up a real meeting over the phone for drama, or in her case, talking down to a PRESIDENT. I don't care how much of a pompous jerk he is, he deserves some respect as a head of state. Doing the breathe-in-breathe-out thing like u do for a child was so patronizing. Shes there to interview. That does NOT make her his equal. He didn't answer the question once, she should have let it drop, come back to it later if she had a chance. Don't get hung up on one thing. She blew the interview.
dear donnie darko, people are people. therefore they are equal.
This reminds me of Bill Clinton. Is the media trying to get this president out of office too?
Sorry that came out wrong. Basically, he deserves respect. She did not give him the respect her deserves.
There were a lot of questions there, so I'll just stick to one.
Sarkozy wasn't wrong to leave the interview, he can do whatever he wants. American Politicians usually talk around questions without giving a straight answer, Sarkozy didn't want to answer so he just left.
Enea said...
I think that Leslie Stahl should not have asked the president those questions. I also think that she is educated and she knows what she is doing. Things happen for a reason. I think that she wanted to make the show interesting by asking the president about his personal life. The same thing happens with newspapers. They put information about JJ Simpson on the front page. I am trying to say that Leslie Stahl was trying to make the interview interestign but she crossed the line.
i dont think anyone was wrong in this situation Sarkozy had the wright to no answer the questions and then leave the interview..but he could have handled it better then that..i mean he is the president..he should know how to handle situations like that...and the lady from 60mins was just doing her job, and why shouldnt 60mins air the interview..that whats really happened..if Sarkozy wanted the interview to to reflect him in a postive way he should have and could have acted in a professional mannor
I saw this when it aired on 60 Minutes and it just made me laugh, especially when Sarkozy was flipping out at his press secretary. I don't understand why the cameras were rolling then, before the interview even started. It was just weird.
I also laughed when I watched this on TV.
No wonder he was so mad about having to take the interview - they probably only asked his people about his wife during the briefing and not much about what's going on in France with their politics and their new greener policies.
I think that she should have dropped it when he didn't answer the first time. Did she think that if she kept asking he would have a change of heart?
Obviously Sarkozy was upset about him and his wife. There is no need for the public to pry into his business between him and his wife. I don't care about the presidents personal life and I think that reporters need to back off.
I am curious as to how long the interview really lasted. I don't think that she blew the interview. Sarkozy was upset before the interview even began. Claiming annoyance over the question about his wife was just a way out. The question was relevant though. Listening at the end of the clip, Stahl says that the divorce of the Sarkozy's was a first for a French President. That is relevant. We think really nothing of divorce, but how many of our presidents have gotten divorced while in office? It is a sign of the times. The individual is central in America. The family is central in France. Sarkozy's "situation" signals a major shift in culture. Reporters want the juicy details, which isn't always a bad thing. Just because he stormed out does not make Stahl a bad interviewer. Look at Christiane Amanpour. She has been stormed out on by government leaders. Does that make her a poor interviewer?
Post a Comment