It's interesting to see how the MSM covered the Palin speech in Hong Kong. First, consider this negative AP story. It makes Palin look like a rank amateur, and it bashes her with paragraphs like this -- the second in the story:
Two US delegates left early, according to AFP, with one saying "it was awful, we couldn't stand it any longer." He declined to be identified.
A number of people who heard the speech in a packed hotel ballroom, which was closed to the media, said Mrs. Palin spoke from notes for 90 minutes and that she was articulate, well-prepared and even compelling.
"The speech was wide-ranging, very balanced, and she beat all expectations," said Doug A. Coulter, head of private equity in the Asia-Pacific region for LGT Capital Partners.
Other AP stories I've seen -- rewrites -- are not as negative as the AP story cited here. That makes me think that the AP story cited here was the first one, and that subsequent stories were softened up after AP editors saw what other new outlets were putting out.
I'm always intrigued by how two reporters can go to a meeting or event and come away with totally different stories about what took place.