"Questions are being raised about PBS anchor Gwen Ifill's objectivity after news surfaced that she is releasing a new book promoting Barack Obama and other black politicians who have benefited from the civil rights struggle.
Ifill is moderating Thursday night's vice-presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. Her book, "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," is due to be released about the same time the next president takes the oath of office.
In her book, Ifill contends that the black political structure of the civil rights movement has cleared the way for post-racial politicians to ascend to new heights." -foxnews.com-
Is this right? Is it fair? I don't believe so. I think it's a travesty that anyone who supports either candidate publicly would moderate any sort of debate. Could you be objective, assuming you have strong views towards one candidate or the other? I don't believe I could. I'm sure I would make an attempt to hit Obama with tough questions such as Bill O'Reilly did in his interview, while letting McCain off the hook.
My end-all question goes out to all Dems and liberals. How would you feel if say, Sean Hannity (an outspoken conservative) moderated this debate?
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
PBS anchor Gwen Ifill's book "The Breakthrough" isn't anything near a shameless promotion for Barack Obama; it actually hones in on the changes of "black politics" throughout history. Not mentioning Obama anywhere in this book would be foolish, as he is a modern, near-perfect example that plainly shows the evolution of our once corrupt political structure moving (slowly but surely) towards true equality. This book, in fact, focuses of achievements of many OTHER African American politicians, for example "Colin Powell (R) is in there, as is Newark mayor Corey Booker (D), Alabama Congressman Artur Davis (D), and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D)."
As far as Ifill's moderation abilities are concerned, I'm confident that she will perform the duty well. She's no rookie in the political game, and knows exactly what role she needs to fulfill during the debate.
In this crucial stage of the General Election, we all-- Republicans and Democrats alike--need all the information we can get, and Gwen Ifill is going to facilitate an environment primed for debating.
The question of race is something we as a country cannot ignore. This is the first time in America's history that a African-American has been a final presidential candidate. One thing to think about with regards to the debate is that Obama will not be the one answering questions. After the experience that Ifill has had, it is doubtful she will give easier questions to either Biden or Palin.
I don't think it's a fair to assume that only Republicans would get upset about this. I don't think it is fair for either party or candidate for a possible bias to be shown. My first thought as a Democrat when I heard about this situation was that I was unhappy because any type of bias towards any candidate during the debate would allow people to say that a candidate didn't do good or only did good because of the moderator. (And I'm not saying that I think there was a bias shown.)
lmbutterbaugh:
It's really unrealistic for anyone to believe that any moderator is unbiased towards one candidate or another, therefore by that reasoning, I should have no problem with Ifill. But I believe that there are some ethical standards that must be upheld here. Ethical standards are such that someone who publicly espresses favoritism for one party over another should not moderate between the two. Ethical standards also clearly require someone who stands to have financial gain remove themselves from this activity because they cannot be impartial. What of the conflict of money? It is quite obvious that if Obama wins, with the book being released on Inagauration Day, sales will spike.
What if the book was titled "Great Military Pilots: A History of John McCain and Others whom Served"?
I hope, and believe as she is a professional, that Ifill can be objective, but even if she could the magnifying glass will be so great that it may be better for her to not moderate due to poor publicity. This is a pure case of conflict of interest.
Further, I don't believe I called her book a "shameless promotion for Barack Obama", nor am I against the writing of the book. In fact, I believe that I gave a rather short synopsis of the book as follows: "In her book, Ifill contends that the black political structure of the civil rights movement has cleared the way for post-racial politicians to ascend to new heights." Please don't spin me into the bad guy here.
I am inspired by the fact that we have progressed so far as a nation that we can have a strong black man in running to lead our country. Also, I would like to encourage everyone to read "Enough" by Juan Williams. It's a great read about the struggles of the black community and what drags them down as well as what needs to be done to bring it up.
I'm not implicating anyone as being "the bad guy" at all--just simply noting that the sudden craze following this discovery is being spun and spit out in different ways to get people riled up. It obviously worked on you and me.
All who commented to this post have got it right about bias...most of us are leaning one way or another, including all of the the political moderators. I'm guessing they're going to vote, and like the rest of us, they're going to choose (or have already chosen) a candidate. Unless they're ex-Felons, that is.
As far as the money issue goes, I'm no economist. Honestly, I reach for my calculator when doing simple adding and subtracting. I know little about book markets, but whether Obama wins this election or not, this book is going to blow up sales, thanks to the attention it is getting now. Scandalous.
Post a Comment