Palin: Can guard against the next hostile interview by filming it herself —and posting it.

Glenn Reynolds in “Bring Your Own Camera” in the NY Post discusses an idea that I have had for several years. Why do people leave themselves open to editing bias in their interviews when the technology for making their own recording is so cheap and easy to use?

I would never go into an interview without my own recorder or video camera. It’s stupid an unnecessary. And how can the media reporter possibly object? In fact, two cameras can be used so that one can be focused on the interview itself and another on the cameras and editors used by the media. It would be interesting, informative and entertaining all at the same time.

CHARLIE Gibson's ABC interview with Republican veep candidate Sarah Palin produced a lot of complaints from Palin fans. There's not much anyone in the campaign can do about journalists like Gibson misstating candidates' "exact words," but there is something that candidates - and anyone else interviewed by a possibly hostile media - can do to make sure that things get played straight in the editing process.

You just have to break the camera monopoly. Luckily, that's become easy.
...
If I were a candidate, I think I'd bring my own camera to interviews, shoot the whole thing and post the unedited raw video on the Web.

The technology for this is easy - I've got a little Sony HD video camera that records on a chip and fits in a coat pocket or purse - and putting video on the Web is a snap, too.

Of course, the knowledge that this will happen is likely to be enough to keep people honest - but if anything is edited unfairly, the full video will tell the tale. ...

TV journalists won't be happy with this, of course, but it's hard to see a principled basis for objecting.

It's all about opening the process up to the people. More democracy, more openness is a good thing.