Chicagoist: Gwen Ifill, VP Debate Moderator, Is Having A Bad Week

Spook

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:00:18 -0600

Thanks Shawn P. I really get tired of arguing this with small town minds. The right wing has not only a billion dollar propagana operations based on swift boat lies and one progressive cries out the truth boldy with our fear and they get classed as "biased" and un truthful as if any person on the left( including Mike Moore could compare to the numerous Ann Vile Cultures, O'Riely, and Limbaugh. When are folks gonna wake up, We need a new generation of thinkers instead of the NPR bunch

pawplusshoe

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:02:13 -0600

Whether or not Ifill seems biased ( I dont think she will), or Palin blithers on like a deranged woman-child (I **hope** she does), the fact is that we still won't be able to predict the results of the election before November 4th. A lot of cockamamey gaffes and crises can occur between now and then, and the oddly narrow margins in the polls can go either way in four weeks. Speaking of narrow margins, does anyone else find it alarming that Obama's lead isn't wayyy bigger considering this week's Palin, jaw dropping, I-can't-believe-he-chose-her events?

TRoyal

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:35:50 -0600

And she has every right to play the race card. She was apparently okay to moderate some debates with white dudes, but now there's a black dude involved, so she's OBVIOUSLY in the tank for him. I don't give a damn how partisan you are, but that at least has to SEEM fishy, doesn't it? She's writing a book about black politicians - are you going to say that she can't? Of course Obama's IN the book, but it's not a Obama nut-hugging book. And doesn't a moderator just move shit along? "You got 10 minutes to answer this question, and the other person has ten to answer the same gotdamned one."

matilda

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:03:36 -0600

Artdude; That's probably true. These days, the most cynical explanation seems to be the right one. God, we are fucked. No leadership at all anymore. Just propaganda wars.

artdude75

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:58:10 -0600

perhaps the mccain group agreed to ifill as the moderator, because they knew that they could pull the favoritism card when the time comes.

matilda

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:31:20 -0600

When will these hard-core conservatives be beaten back into their mole hills? First, McCain has said he sees no problems with the moderator. Two, THE GODDAMN BOOK HAS YET TO BE PUBLISHED, yet people think they know what's in it based on a title or their own partisan leanings. When did working the refs (meaning the press) come to be a strategy for the conservatives instead of a mere tactic? This crap has been offered for nearly 50 years now by reactionaries, yet people still fall for this crap. In any case, a good candidate can work past any moderator, no matter how biased or not (or, how biased that moderator is perceived to be). If the candidate can't, then perhaps that candidate is not prepared to lead. Albany: Very funny line. And all so true, it seems.

Marcus Gilmer

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:27:50 -0600

@SeanP - regarding the debacle of Stepho and Gibson, I was happy that I got a chance to talk to Bob Schieffer last week about his approach to his debate compared to this. Check out some of his answers here. "It will not be about jewelry" was such a great answer.

SeanP

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:23:18 -0600

As "biased" (please for the love of God notice the quotes) as Ifill might be; she still could not do worse of a job moderating as Lehrer did last week. While I have always respected the man as a journalist, he looked like he needed to be put out to pasture. And if we want to talk about biased moderating, does anyone remember that primary debate with Stephanopolous and Gibson a few months back, where all the questions to Obama were about his flag pin and ties to Ayers while George backed down from asking Hillary anything substantial? The sad (or maybe not so sad) truth is that journalists, i.e. not pundits, happen to be left-leaning simply because (and oh, god I know I'm going to hear about this) they are educated and worldly. They do not try to see things from a simply one-dimensional perspective, but from all facets. Being open to the world's experiences opens your mind, and frankly open-mindedness is a cornerstone of liberal (not necessarily Democratic) values.

dopplerd

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:50:12 -0600

Spook: My point of Air America and Rush being equal is on the biased to objective spectrum. Both are biased media. Neither claims to be objective. If people focused on media not as liberal to conservative but from biased to objective then the premise of Fox News as a counterweight to liberal media doesn't work. Conservative media doesn't balance liberal media, they both end up tilting all media to the biased end of my new media viewpoint spectrum. The balance to any biased media, either liberal or conservative, should be objective journalism. The problem is that we really like biased media.

dopplerd

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:38:12 -0600

Ward: Are you sure that the "(who is white)" was said by Ifill? Here is the original article. The quote reads very awkwardly with Ifill stating the "who is white" and only makes sense in the context of the next question the interviewer asks which is about race. Maybe she is such a good reporter she can anticipate the next question. Why would she drop something like that in? I think the author should have used brackets not parentheses to indicate that the additional information was added by the author and not said by Ifill. I have never seen parentheses used in a quotation, only brackets. And only to indicate when the words are NOT to be attributed to the person quoted. Please show me one example of another quotation written this way were the person quoted actually said what was in parentheses. Fail on your assertion that Ifill is injecting race. This is a typo by the AP journalist (using () instead of []) and Michelle Malkin and the rest of the repub bloggers are so desparate they are getting their panties in a twist over a friggen typo. Get a life and focus on how unqualified McCain's VP canidate is instead of predicting that Ifill is some sort of Obama plant to ambush her. Ifill had nothing to do with the verbal vomit she spewed out when Couric asked her a reasonable question about the economic bailout plan. Ifill had nothing to do with Palin's repeated lies about the bridge to Ketchican. Ifill had nothing to do with the Monahan firing or charging rape victims for the investigation or not knowing what the Bush doctrine is or making a stink about "lipstick on a pig" or any of the other stupid stuff McCain Palin have done on their own accord. The Strait Talk Express needs to buck up and accept some responsibility for what they have done and not just blame the media for factually reporting their stupidity. /rant

Spook

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:33:54 -0600

"In my book Air America and Rush Limbaugh are equal" another reason why I'm really starting to hate liberals

Ward Up

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:35:50 -0600

Gwen Ifill keeps digging herself a deeper hole. She is now playing the race card, as shown with this quote in an Associated Press story today: '...Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama. “Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?” said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, “I don’t know what it is. I find it curious.” ' Yeah, sure, Gwen, we are questioning your impartiality because of your race. Race, race, race. You seem to be the only one bringing race into this matter.

Pinwiz11

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:04:28 -0600

I'd worry if this debate required any real moderating, but it's going to be speech followed by speech. I sincerely doubt that Ifill has any real say about the questions asked. If it were to have been a debate like the previous one, where there was a lot more leeway, I'd take this a bit more seriously.

Ward Up

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:26:52 -0600

The parties that screwed go far beyond the lightweight Gwen Ifill. The Presidential Debate Commission and the left-leaning leadership of PBS should have known better. But PBS says "..see no problem..." with the Ifill situation. What journalism school did they attend? The jokers in those two bodies are the REAL story. Not Gwen Ifill. As for Ifill, you want to be a commentator/writer who gives opinions and support favoring one side? That's fine. I have no problem with that. Just don't expect to be moderating debates.

Ingrid

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:54:06 -0600

They both know what all of the questions are, so what's the point of even having a debate? We are not going to learn anything about either candidate. This is pure entertainment. Although I'm going to have a hard time getting through the first 5 minutes anyway...Palin's voice makes me want to stab my ears out. And the voice would be a lot easier to swallow if she would just, for once, answer a direct question with a direct answer and not a) lie or b) amble around the stage with her annoying non sequiturs. Maybe I'll do what Palin did when she said she watched the SNL parody, but she watched it with the sound muted. It's going to be a cringe-worthy performance, I'm sure.

fremo

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:39:07 -0600

Fed, Yep - I wouldn't let Hanitty or Limbaugh, or Olberman or Maddow, or anyone like that near a debate that was deemed "impartial". 'Cause clearly, none of them are. I don't doubt the book is an honest effort - its just that the title can be implied (and you got to work to make the justification) to be a "rah-rah" for Obama. Where's she getting the questions from? Does she come up with them herself? Or does an independent group of some sort? I can't find anything on the debate website.

dopplerd

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:26:30 -0600

What bugs me is that everyone things that the spectrum of journalistic views runs from liberal to conservative. I disagree. What we should be considering is the spectrum from biased to objective. In my book Air America and Rush Limbaugh are equal. Not that they agree with each other but that they have a distinct bias. Gwen Ifill ranks about as close to objective as you can get. The McCain Palin crew agreed to Ifill as moderator. This book is listed on amazon.com so it is not like it is some big secret. The book is about the changing landscape of politics and race in the US. It is NOT a biography about Obama as some (not here) have claimed. Colin Powell is also included. This is a tempest in a teapot drummed up by McPalin to distract us from the fact that Palin is uniquely and supremely unqualified to be president. Side note: Here are the most popular keywords for the book on amazon, 4 months before it is released. biased (73) media bias (69) racist (60) slanted (46) socialism (41) marxism (40) Conservatives are now apparentlt able to judge a book before they even see its cover.

fed up

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:24:31 -0600

I some how doubt that everyone here would feel it was just fine for Hanitty or Limbaugh to moderate a debate. With here book about Obama coming out on inaguration day she does have a vested intrest in him getting elected.

fremo

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:15:37 -0600

Actually, now that I think about it, McCain and Co. most likely DID know about Ilfin's book, and will leverage the implied favortism regardless of how Palin does.

Stealth

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:04:53 -0600

I see your point, fremo. Anything to make Palin look like the wounded party and not the ill-informed token that she is.. And albany, very funny.

fremo

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:52:05 -0600

I know I am going to catch some flak for this, but I think they should swap her with someone else. I agree with the previous posts that she will most likely be fair, and in her role as moderator, she cannot really play sides due to her role's responsibilities. I personally laud her for the way she handled Cheney and Edwards' bitchfest in 2004. However, there will be enough implied favortism, spread by the conservative ilk (and watching their message boards/listening to their commentators makes me ill), that it might overall taint the debate. It wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened in politics, but I think in the best interests of a pure environment, Palin against Biden, she should drop out.

Albanyparkour

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:49:27 -0600

Books have a well-known liberal bias.

jennyblur

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:44:45 -0600

If she was fit enough to moderate in 2004 between Edwards and Cheney, she is certainly fit enough now. This is just one more lame hail-mary stunt from the McCain campaign to keep Palin from making even more of an ass of herself. Further, McCain would have to be functionally retarded to have not known about this book as it was disclosed to the AP a full TWO WEEKS before the moderators were agreed on. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/judd-legum/ifill-book-public-weeks-b_b_130834.html Also: why does anyone this book will be a glowing endorsement of Obama? She is a journalist, who is starting a dialogue about race in this country in the context of our first African-American nominee. If I hear the words "the the tank for Obama" one more time, I will kill myself.

Stealth

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:40:30 -0600

How will writing a book affect her objectivity? She's a debate moderator on national television. She just asked questions, checks the clock and tells the other guy they have time for a rebuttal, right? What is she going to do, cut Palin off after a few seconds. ("Oh, nevermind, you don't know what you're talking about. Mr. Biden, you have 20 minutes for a rebuttal.") And the other moderators don't have a favorite candidate? They aren't going to vote?