If you apply for a job, you expect the interviewer to ask hard questions.

If you hire a contractor to work on your home, you want to ask some tough questions about the work they've done and how reliable they are.

Even if you buy a new appliance or a new car, people generally ask the sales personnel hard questions about how the vehicle performs, the warranty and other services.

So, one has to wonder why asking hard questions of political candidates is such a bad thing.

Sarah Palin is the latest, but certainly not the only, candidate who equates hard questions with unfairness. She and presidential candidate John McCain recently sat down with an interview with Katie Couric and Charles Gibson.

Palin, who has a journalism degree from the University of Idaho, went so far as to say that the questions were unethical. Here's what she said in answer to a question:

"Well, I have a degree in journalism also, so it surprises me that so much has changed since I received my education in journalistic ethics all those years ago. But I'm not going to pick a fight with those who buy ink by the barrelful. I'm going to take those shots and those pop quizzes and just say that's okay, those are good testing grounds."

The questions that Palin was asked by Gibson and Couric who don't buy ink except to fill up their computer printer were about comments Palin had made earlier that seemed to contradict the position of her running mate and a question asking about her understanding of the Bush Doctrine.

The interviews appear to have been aired in their entirety, so Palin and McCain can't complain that was done unfairly.

Instead, they are complaining that some straightforward questions to find out the vice presidential candidate's views are somehow "unethical."

It's interesting to note that the dean of the journalism department at the University of Idaho commented a few days later that he didn't think the questions were unethical.

Of course, this is part of the McCain campaign strategy and has been since the GOP convention. McCain and Palin want to make it seem as if the media are against them, and they take every opportunity to make that point. Some cynics would say that it's a way to avoid answering the real questions, and to a degree it worked in the Couric and Gibson interviews. The candidates started complaining about "gotcha" questions, and Palin never really did explain her understanding of the Bush Doctrine.

It's a strategy that has been used before. Somewhere in my collection of stuff I still have an "Annoy the Media Re-elect Bush" bumper sticker.

Although the strategy didn't work too well for Bush the senior, if that's how McCain and Palin want to run their campaign, it's OK with me.

But in my experience in journalism, it's rarely the questions that are unfair. Reporters ask questions, and they should ask political candidates hard questions. Reporters should ask questions that give candidates a chance to explain their views and to explain apparent contradictions. Generally, the more questions you ask, the better you get to know the candidate.

Without a doubt, there are instances of bias in the way stories are presented or in how the answers to questions are portrayed.

But asking candidates, who are basically applying for jobs with the American people, hard questions, is what journalists do. It has never been unethical to ask hard questions.

gsawyer@herald-review.com|421-6975