What Bill Clinton Wrote vs. What Bill Clinton Said

[cynatnite]

If you were following any journalists on Twitter last night, one of the most remarked upon aspects of Bill Clinton's nomination speech was how liberally he deviated from the prepared text. What was handed out to the media was four pages of single-spaced, small font text, but — as an exasperated TelePrompTer operator found out —that was really just a guideline to what Clinton actually wanted to say. We decided to compare the two versions to see how one of the great speechmakers of his era goes about his business.

This is the speech as it was written:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CVN_BILL_CLINTON_TRANSCRIPT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&38;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

This is what he actually said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/us/politics/transcript-of-bill-clintons-speech-to-the-democratic-national-convention.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

http://news.yahoo.com/bill-clinton-wrote-vs-bill-clinton-said-151430069.html?_esi=1

[Bluenorthwest]

1. Bookmarking

thanks.

[jsr]

2. Like a true master

[KoKo]

3. That's pretty cool. Why did they think he'd give them full text of his speech anyway?

Who would have bothered to watch if they could read it beforehand.

They think this sharp fox is an idiot? Someone who isn't media savvy after all these years?

[EC]

4. During the speech

I texted my daughter that it looked like he was speaking extemporaneously.