A friend pointed out that our top liar narrows his eyes when he tells a really big lie. And then I remembered how people with a message can just tell it as it is, and don't need to read it. I've heard speeches by people who know what they are talking about and are interested in it, who have a piece of paper in front of them for some vital numerical data or dates, but speak normally and only have the notes for reference.
A scripted or unscripted politician does not mean an honest politician. Honesty and lies can be transmitted either way.
Good answers, but most people, while being skeptics officially, absorb information from media playing in the background while doing something else, and when that happens it gets past their critical facilities, and gets accepted.
Take this speech for example: [President Biden Holds a Press Conference Feb 24th] [transcript] "Sorry to keep you waiting. The Russian military has begun a brutal assault on the people of Ukraine without provocation, without justification, without necessity. This is a premeditated attack Vladimir Putin has been planning this for months as I've been saying all along. He moved more than 175,000 troops, military equipment into positions along the Ukrainian border. He moved blood supplies into position and built a field hospital which tells you all you need to know about his intentions all along..."
The "Sorry to keep you waiting" set the scene, that he had been delayed getting some last minute information about the war. It strongly implied the speech had not been drafted months before, and that the war was a surprise. The 'brutal assault" contradicts the reports from the front that the Russian forces were 'disorganized, confused, badly led' in other words ineffective. Both statements can not be simultaneously true. and so on. the 175,000 troops was so much smaller than IIRC the UAF of 500,000 NATO trained and equipped troops ready with 200,000 in reserve. Comparing the numbers makes it obvious the troops Russia moved in were not intended to take over the country. and so on, the whole speech as far as I could bear to listen to it, was just lies. I hate: lies and wars.
Some equate the smooth and confident delivery of a well written, focus group tested speech as "Presidential". They think that it's important that the POTUS remain scripted and polished and that every word he says first goes through a gauntlet of lawyers, publicists, and propagandists, before it can be permitted to be uttered. Sanitized for their protection, as it were. Some would rather hear what the POTUS thinks; unfiltered, and unscripted.
I remember that in 2010, Barack Obama was the first person, ever, to use a teleprompter to address the Parliament of India. People laughed at him. But the truth is that the first American president to use a teleprompter sort-of-a-device was Dwight Eisenhower, way back in January, 1954. Therefore, I would suggest that if there's anything 'bad' here, it's not the teleprompter, it's what's being READ FROM THE TELEPROMPTER that can be so very, very wrong....
Yes, but I would hope Ike has sometimes spoken without a teleprompter, and again it is ok to have notes, maybe. But I've heard people who really believe what they are saying and are so into it they can talk for an hour or two without notes, people who are really into what they are saying. Just a thought really.
Would you believe a politician who read from notes or from a teleprompter? I assume a politician is lying until proven truthful regardless of the source of the words.
Correct. Since Eisenhower, many presidents have used teleprompters, although supposedly (can't verify it for sure) President Kennedy did not use one. The 'teleprompter' controversy reflects why it is so important that we have press conferences which directly include presidents, with thorough questioning allowed for all reporters, whether liberal or conservative. In press conferences, teleprompters don't do anyone any good as far as I know.... In such venues, any president who just bubbles, babbles, "circles-back", or just walks away makes a fool of himself, and it's apparent to everyone who witnesses it.
Considering how every word, facial expression, and body movement is analyzed on social media by our mass collection of internet experts, going off the cuff is more of a recipe for disaster than not.
The method of presentation has little to do with "honesty" If a politician is going to lie or be evasive he will do it in any form.
True, but notes or the whole text on a teleprompter is a big help when the politician is saying one thing in private and something completely different in public, like Hillary stated she does.
Lying is complicated so it really helps to have a teleprompter. Remember the spokesperson who said Joe Biden is doing what he can to reduce gasoline prices, which contradicted what she had that Joe Biden has no control over gasoline prices? And that's just the start. We know there had been a low level war going on in Ukraine since 2014 as presented in the film documentary Ukraine on Fire released in 2016. How is anyone going to square that with the claim that Russia started it on Feb 24th 2022?
