The debate last night was featured by the three news outlets and all summarized the debate similarly, that Sen. Barack Obama was under pressure from the moderators and Sen. Hillary Clinton.
The Los Angeles Times was fair in the way it portrayed the debate, noting the key points, and saying that important items such as the economy and Iraq weren’t brought up until almost an hour into the debate to focus in on such “important” factors like Obama’s choice to not sport a flag pin, yes hard hitting issues.
The New York Times, published in Clinton’s senatorial home state, clearly was of the opinion that Obama was cracking under the pressure. Perhaps the NY Times may be showing some favoritism for its senator as not only were most of the questions ridiculous, but pointless as well, the facts of which would have no bearing on the politics at hand.
The Washington Post, like the LA Times explained the night clearly and succinctly seemingly without any bias. It was interesting to see that The Post went into more of the specifics of some of the questioning of Clinton and her trip to Bosnia twelve years ago in which she claimed to be under sniper fire, only later to be shown at the very least embellishments.
The best and fair summaries of last night’s debate came on The Post’s website and the LA Times website. While The NY Times did explain the debate, it positioned the report in a way to favor Clinton, even exclaiming that it was a weak showing for Obama.
My biggest concern with the debate, and most that are conducted nowadays, is that these aren’t true debates. The issues brought up do not really reveal much of anything the candidate has to offer as president and after over twenty debates it wouldn’t surprise to have a tough time finding many people who could give a clear look at any candidates’ stances on major political issues.
And if that isn’t enough, the moderators were completely out of line most of the night. And my lowlight of the debate: questioning Obama about not wearing a flag pin. SERIOUSLY? Please tell me America is not that politically haywire that anyone would read into that at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment