| Abstrakt: |
This article examines one common technique employed by questioners to present for attention views which are potentially hostile or damaging to the podium and/or his clients. To emphasize that the neutrality of the interviewer is an artifice, Clayman employs the term neutralism to describe it. He points out that it is normal for interviewees to acknowledge and acquiesce to the neutral or neutralistic stance of their interlocutor. He claims that it is, in fact, constructed and maintained collaboratively. One frequent source of facts, stories and opinions is, of course, the newspapers. To investigate examples of attribution to the papers, sentence concordances were made of the words Post and Times since these words are common in newspaper titles. To recapitulate, then, a question from the floor is both more difficult to avoid and also more difficult to answer if the primary source quoted is an official, governmental one, or one which might generally be expected to be friendly. It is a relatively simple matter for the podium to rebut the criticisms expressed by those expected to be critical of or antagonistic to the White House -- political rivals, the Republican party, foreign enemies, the right-wing media, etc., because, since they are not neutral, the podium is under no requirement to be so either. |
