Question

To put this 1978 film in its historical context, it superficially refers to the political upheavals in Portugal centering on the Carnation Revolution of 1974 through the 1976 election of the Socialist Party, marking the end of the National Salvation Junta.

To date there are two reviews posted here, by David in 2003 and by rsoonsa in 2010, both of which I find helpful in interpreting what Godard and Miéville are trying to accomplish in the film. I have only the most superficial acquaintance with Derrida, semiotics, or deconstructionism, and frequently it's difficult for me to understand where the film is openly didactic, or where it may use an absurdity to make its point.

First I want to dispose of any misinterpretation of this seemingly absurd analogy, a little past 53', that must not be taken literally - the speaker is not Odette's father, and this is not how biological reproduction works: "One day I entered a corridor: your mother's [vagina]. And a few months later, you came out of this corridor. This tunnel. This canal. There was an input and an output. And your mother had received a signal. How does she communicate it? How does it go from the entry to the exit? Of the reproduction machine. The copying machine. You are a copy of me. But maybe your mother made mistakes when copying. Maybe, even surely, she transmitted information that she shouldn't have." Certainly a strained analogy, but its point is easy to understand. (English from Olive Films subtitles.)

What is confusing to me, though, is this, a bit before 22':
  Odette (Miéville): "In my opinion, there's not Portugal first and then the typewriter. There is a typewriter first and then a Portugal which enters this machine."
  Editor: "You say it enters, but it exits too!"
  Odette: "All right. But how does it come out? How does Portugal come out of it? How does it go from entry to exit? We should ask ourselves this: how does it go from entry to exit? Our power as journalists lies there, not anywhere else! It isn't in France or Portugal, but in between."

Yes, but nothing begins with the typewriter. Odette's fingers are not autonomous; and the machine certainly is not. Without a Portugal there is nothing for her to type. She must have an idea, an interpretation; perhaps a photograph, which itself may be misleading. Both of these quoted examples appear to deal with errors introduced between entry and exit; but the event, the information transmitted, the interpretation, the ideation, must precede the typing; and it's here that errors occur. What am I misunderstanding? Exactly what do "entry" and "exit" refer to in this context?