Palin Appears To Be Wearing an Earpiece During The Debate

Wireless IFB (interruptible fold back) systems are also known as wireless ITE (in the ear) systems in Europe and some other countries. IFB systems are designed for use in broadcast and motion picture production to provide high quality monaural audio for crew communications, program audio monitoring and talent cueing.

The compact, base station transmitter provides mic or line level inputs and a direct interface for popular intercom systems. The battery operated belt-pack transmitter will accept microphone or line level inputs and is ideal for use on sound carts. The belt-pack receiver offers a switch selected preset/startup frequency, plus up to 5 additional stored frequencies selectable with a simple button push. The receiver provides adequate power to drive any type of headphone, earbud or induction neck loop and automatically senses a stereo or mono mini plug and switches accordingly.

Every single live news operation uses them. End of conspiracy.



[edit on 3-10-2008 by rocksarerocks]

reply to post by rocksarerocks


Yeah, but (thanks for that great info, BTW)

Did Biden have one, as well???

Look, I'm just trying to be fair.

I'll have to show my bias, however....FULL DISCLOSURE...

I think McCain/Palin are the worst possible option, in this election.

But, as it pertains to earpieces....well, the Secret Service wear them too.

'Nuf said!!!

reply to post by slywhite


I disagree palin was looking down most the time, and I thought ::she has all the answers in front of her!!!

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by centurion1211

 

Nice try, 'centurion'...as to your last sentence....

I think just about EVERY modern correspondant you have ever seen on camera has an eairpiece. They have to hear things there, if they are LIVE on camera, then it might be a Producer telling them something, where to look, etc.

Most people would understand the difference between getting a cue on which way to turn for the camera, etc. like news people get vs. being fed whole answers in a debate as the Palinophobes here seem to be suggesting.

I'm officially coining the term "Palinophobe" for use here on ATS, with an official definition of anyone that doesn't like Sarah Palin for any reason. The model for usage this new term comes from "homophobe" as it is currently used to define anyone that objects to anything about gays.

[edit on 10/3/2008 by centurion1211]

This is what she is wearing . . . it's an in-ear monitor, as stated above. It's not only common, but required in most of these case for handling and security. I'm not really suprised by this at all and, quite frankly, am suprised that most people on here are. I'm willing to bet the Biden had one to. And they both used teleprompters . . . in podium and in audience for their prepared (opening/closing speeches).

Have we already forgot about the Presidential Primary debates and the coaching going on during those?

reply to post by solomons path


That's cool, solomon.....I want one!!

No, to be serious, solomon....if I had one, what would be the power source? AND, where would the recievor (efit...spelling?) be?

We're assuming that this earbud would have a tiny battery???

OK, then there would have to be a transmitter, within range....who had it?
\
Is there a battery that small??? To fit the earpiece?

So many questions....perhaps the Secret Service doesn't wish them to be answered....?

Also edit....sheesh, next time I SCUBA, will I come up dead???)


[edit on 10/3/0808 by weedwhacker]

this is a battery operated model . . . they work on the same principal as wireless mics . . . only the signal flows the other way. So, in essence, they are miniature speakers.

Every major sound company now makes these and are how live stage performers prefer their monitor systems, these days. Very expensive models actually make a personal mold of your ear and can be constructed of "real skin" latex.

enjoy the hunt!!!

Edit - the receivers are either belt-type packs or in the ear monitor themselves. The signal would be transmitted through a microphone and routed to the monitor through a basic mixing console in a truck or backstage in a green room.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by solomons path]

Originally posted by slywhite
reply to post by zysin5

 

I don't think it's been determined yet if help was fair permissible.
Does anyone know?

i saw a news source (don't remember which spin it was) saying that some parties involved w/ the debate were asking for the candidates to be searched and checked for earpieces BEFORE the debate, maybe this is what created the controversy to begin with? anyway, even in that story i never heard 100% confirmation that it would be illegal. still is interesting though, if they still gave her one AFTER that story on national news, it would be political suicide.

reply to post by solomons path


solomon, what about the obvious T/R on G W Bush's back, during his debate?

It was 'cleverly' hideen under his suit coat.....but the T/R back then obviously nt as sophisticated as today's models????

Originally posted by RealityisanIllusion
reply to post by Enigma Publius

 

I don't recall saying she was my candidate. I just tried to explain what the device was. I applauded her for wanting to hear the questions better. How horrible of me to do such a thing. I should be horsewhipped.

it just makes no sense to applaud someone for wanting to hear questions they are sopossed (spelling?) to answer. should i be applauded for looking at the keyboard as i type this instead of closing my eyes and using the force? i cannot type correctly with my chicken pecking method without looking, so it just makes sense, and i should not be applauded for it. Geesh.

Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by slywhite

 

But you know what? If that's all you've got to attack Palin with, then that just reaffirms that she did a stellar job last night and you've got no ammo to shoot bunch a bunch of crap.

She did "okay" but it was stellar by comparison to her interviews, which is saying a lot right there . Although she dodged a few questions she did do a lot better than the air-headed Q&A's she gave up until now. Still don't think she is as qualified as any of the others in the race. She's mediocre if anything.

This whole political show is a joke anyway.

Every time I hear someone exclaim how much they care for the little man it makes me crack up. None of them care about the little man as much as they do keeping themselves and their buddies in power and in the money.

"I'll fight for you."

lol come on...do people believe that stuff?

- Lee

I wear these ear pieces on a daily basis, to hear my drummer and to hear myself and the questions asked to me. Not to feed my my lyrics or anything like that. Bottom line she could be using it to hear the moderators questions, her opponent. It is common, it just gets fed through the mixing board so you can hear clearly. At least that is what most in ear monitors are used for in my line of work.

Note, she could have bad hearing and just having to read questions from a teleprompter is a pain in the butt. Here is a side note to her hearing..
Not saying shes deaf but..

kokonutpundits.blogspot.com...

On a side note, I do not think she could be president, but I think all people should be properly informed so you can make a correct decision based on fact and what the candidate stands for, not this bias mud slinging crap that is so rampant on these boards for all candidates.. It is actually sickening.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by ShiftTrio]

reply to post by weedwhacker



Possibly or just a different model . . . the small of the back is the most common place to put any receiver (mic or monitor) when appearing on camera.

You all should also notice the lav mics that each candidate was wearing, as well as having a podium mic, there would be receivers for them as well. This doubling of mics is so one goes straight to record and the other (podium) is routed to the P.A. for sound in-house.

She is the governor of the largest state inb the union for sure. With a population of Memphis, TN. Took her a whole 114,000 votes to get elected. We have more people her in the SUBURBS of Dallas. And she WAS wearing an earpiece. Yes, it matters. That is not allowed in debates. You cannot break the rules to suit your own needs. The American public needs to know the answers form the candidates. This is not Cyrano de Bergerac.

reply to post by solomons path


Not true. The wearing of two mics is so that there is a backup in case the main mic fails on a live broadcast. It is very common. Why would you need 2 mics for what you suggested LOL. You feed the mics to a mixer board and the mixer feeds the news feeds and the PA seperately.

reply to post by Enigma Publius


It's not suicide to wear an IFB that is connected to a mic for camera and time cues. Not at all.

Heres my opinion

As a strong Obama supporter that thoroughly believes McCain and Palin will only bring in another 4years of Bush politics, I dont believe that Palin was wearing an earpiece.

I mean honestly now guys, I expect better than this... Why lower yourself to the level of the rightwing liars who posted all the garbage about Obama prior?

Theres no earpiece.... I dont see an earpeice.... I think this is just propaganda again... and I think Palin held her own in the debate. That being said Biden came out as expected so the debate is in essence a tie... again.

Until somebody can come up with undisputable evidence that she was wearing an earpiece, merely "highlighting" certain parts of the photos aint ganna prove anything.

Lets just stick to the relevant issues and deny ignorance.

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
reply to post by Enigma Publius

 

It's not suicide to wear an IFB that is connected to a mic for camera and time cues. Not at all.

i wasn't talking about an IFB. i totally agree with what you said. the news source stated that parties involved with the debate (i think it was a wireless company or provider but i don't know for sure, that just seems right) was requesting that Palin AND Biden be searched for transmitters in the ear or on their person that would be used for recieving answers to questions, i thought we were clear that it would be totally acceptable to have an IFB for cues and such, i should have been more specific.

reply to post by rocksarerocks


While I agree with the back up . . . the style and positioning was horible if those lavs went live. Also, it's a standard in American broadcasting to have a separate personal (lav) mic going just to record. Not because you need to, as you pointed out in how things get routed, but more for separate shaping and control (comp, etc).

I see it done every day, so regardless of the necessity . . . it's still done.

EDIT - I will add . . . I haven't disagreed with anything you've said, including the back up.



[edit on 3-10-2008 by solomons path]