In The New York Times, reporter Jan Hoffman found an ingenious angle on an old story — a political candidate’s self-image.
She did this not by dialing up a dozen experts about their assessments of Palin, but rather by traveling to Palin’s old hometown of Wasilla, Ak. and interviewing the beauticians who cut her hair. Who else besides friends and family members could better describe Palin’s worldview?
Not many it turns out; the story revealed more about Palin and her neighbors than Hoffman let on.
In the course of the story, Hoffman describes the origin of the Beehive Beauty Shop, the parlor at which Palin got her hair done. Her account noted the following:
With more-established salons throughout the valley, the Beehive would seem a surprising choice for Wasilla’s then-mayor. Mrs. [Jessica J.] Steele started the salon in 1997 when she, a recently separated mother of two, put a salon chair in her garage and painted the interior Barbie pink.
Mrs. Steele relied on word of mouth through local congregations: “We’re all really strong Christians in this shop.”
Well, that last tidbit is interesting: Steele built her business primarily not by ads or promotion, but rather by using the network of local churches; and identifies herself and her staff as religious people. Hmm. So what does that say about the shop and the town?
A bit further down in the story, Hoffman quotes Steele making another comment related to religion and faith:
During Palin appointments, Mrs. Steele, divorced and financially stressed, confided in her client. “Sarah was always saying that God was in control and to have faith that there is a reason for everything,” Mrs. Steele said. “We would say it together.”
Read Steele’s quote again. She said that Palin was “always” talking about God’s sovereignty and that she and Palin talked about it. Clearly, faith and religion are not taboo subjects; quite the contrary.
Hoffman did not see the ghost in her story. As tmatt pointed out in an email to me, in Palin’s world, religious faith is accepted and considered normal; the subject can be discussed openly.
In other words, the small-town world from which Palin hails is religious. It stands to reason that Palin assumes that most other people are religious, too. That’s a key part of the story.
 | Posted at 6:11 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (13) |
September 15, 2008, at 11:35 pm
Not necessarily. There is often (not always) a marked “us (“born again Christians”) and them (everybody else)” mentality in Evangelical circles.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 7:02 am
Hofman’s not the only one interviewing the locals, and finding a mismatch between Palins take on religion and more mainstream society. Based on the account below, she’s quite loopy. Perhaps better off not discussing religion, if your religion is barking mad?
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/15/bess/index1.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 9:17 am
Ah yes, nothing like using language that evokes images of panzers smashing across the boarders of Poland. Taking over? You mean, getting candidates that a person may agree with? With that choice of words, the credibility of that piece went through the floor. Remember, Evangelicals aren’t the only ones who may insist they have the stars on their bellies. To assume they are the ones wanting to take over, brings out a bias that taints anything else being said.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 2:38 pm
Dave G, I find nothing infringing credibility in the media using the words “take over” with respect to creationists. That’s what they did in Kansas in 1999 and that’s what they tried to do in Ohio immediately thereafter.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 2:58 pm
Tom Rees writes,
You consider Salon a journalistic source?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 3:11 pm
Touché
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 16, 2008, at 7:05 pm
Taking over… aka… winning elections.
So is anyone tracking coverage of Gov. Palin’s belief system versus, say, Gov. Romney’s? Specifically, I would be interested to know if journalists who are appalled by Palin’s faith were also appalled by Romney’s, or, who were appalled at people who were appalled at Romney’s?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 17, 2008, at 12:06 pm
The creationists in Ohio did not run as such. They got a cadre on the state school board and then began promoting so-called intelligent design. The evolutionists organized and won elections.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 17, 2008, at 12:36 pm
Give me a break! I read the entire NY Times fluff piece and I’m really getting tired of liberal media reporting on everything except where the candidate stands on the issues. I watched Barbara Walters on the VIEW today, question whether Palin could be a VP AND a mother of FIVE children. Let me tell you this…if she was a democrat running for office, this stuff on her Christianity and her motherhood wouldn’t be an issue. I think liberals just can’t stand it, that there’s a woman out there, worth voting for, because of what she stands for. They want their feminist ‘butch’ woman that has to act and look like an ugly man to get ahead in politics. That’s just not the case. Palin proves that you can still be feminine, attractive, a mom of 5, a loving wife, conservative, AND be intelligent, powerful, and someone who can bring REAL and AUTHENTIC change to D.C.
Democrats are shaking in their shoes, because Palin is the real deal, and they’ve got nothing to contradict that, but to attact her in as many ways as possible. Cast fear in peoples’ views that she will be a radical Christian imposing her Christianity on everyone! Cast doubt, that she can’t do the job, because she’s a mom. Cast skepticism, that she doesn’t know her “Bush Doctrine” and therefore is too inexperienced to do the job, despite the fact that she has more executive experience than their Presidential candidate, Obama.
Give me a break. Who cares who her hairdresser is, what her stylist says, and if Palin is counseling a divorced stylist with the best advice you could possibly give someone in that situation?! Let’s talk politics and issues and what they stand for, and leave the sexism out please.
Spare me the sexism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 17, 2008, at 12:40 pm
Dave and Angela,
Please confine your comments to my post, not about the political machinations of creationists in Ohio or liberals’ distaste for Gov. Palin.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 17, 2008, at 10:09 pm
How is Salon not a “journalistic source?” They send reporters out to get stories, and they publish those stories online. Yes, they have a slant, but so does everyone. Salon admits to it up front. Admittedly, there are a lot more blogs on the site now than in the past, but this story was not one of them. So again, how is Salon not a “journalistic source?” What is the definition of “journalistic” in these parts?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 18, 2008, at 2:27 am
As a rule, Salon’s stories don’t feature both or all sides in a dispute. They get one side: theirs. This is a political or propagandistic standard, not a journalistic one.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 19, 2008, at 3:05 pm
Mark, getting back to your post,
“In other words, the small-town world from which Palin hails is religious. It stands to reason that Palin assumes that most other people are religious, too. That’s a key part of the story.”
By that logic it also could stand to reason that Palin assumes that most other people come from small towns.
The only thing the story proves is that the hairdresser and Palin shared a common set of religious assumptions, which is certainly nothing remarkable in any small town in any part of the world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0