More Media Bias

[Liam]

Read the Rep forums. Plenty of hysterics on how she was "not fair" in her questioning.

I couldnt find fault, or I missed it if she did. I would imagine she read the news papers and was most careful on not being biased.

I'm still waiting. C'mon, Shark, Bush_Cheney. You had to have seen something. The big, bad, east coast liberal media elite must have done something to offend your sensibilities and must have done something to show Gwen was in the tank for Obama. Something. Please. Enlighten us.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm still waiting. C'mon, Shark, Bush_Cheney. You had to have seen something. The big, bad, east coast liberal media elite must have done something to offend your sensibilities and must have done something to show Gwen was in the tank for Obama. Something. Please. Enlighten us.

Newsmax has already covered this...if you don't understand the concept of "conflict of interest" or "appearance of impropriety"....too bad.:

Ifill tipped her hand when she hosted a discussion on PBS’ “Washington Week” on Sept. 5, after the close of the Republican convention that nominated Palin.

Ifill showed a video showing Palin saying, “Here’s a little news flash for those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion, I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this great country.”

Ifill sniped: “Wow, was she talking about us, or just changing the subject?”

Later Ifill said about Palin: “Lots of talk about, what, gutting caribou or whatever — I shouldn’t say it this way — gutting caribou in Alaska, which I’m sure is a fine, fine thing to do.” That drew laughter from the audience. “What I’m just saying, we heard a lot more about what Sarah Palin did for sport or what she did as a mother or what she did — than what she did as a governor actually, the actual policy decisions.”

Ifill also raised this point: “This is a weird question, but what don’t we know about Sarah Palin?”

As I already posted, Ifill made at least one error during the debate by injecting her opinion/comment about Biden's positions in the past.

Edited October 4, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Liam]

Newsmax has already covered this...if you don't understand the concept of "conflict of interest" or "appearance of impropriety"....too bad.:

Ifill tipped her hand when she hosted a discussion on PBS’ “Washington Week” on Sept. 5, after the close of the Republican convention that nominated Palin.

Ifill showed a video showing Palin saying, “Here’s a little news flash for those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion, I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this great country.”

Ifill sniped: “Wow, was she talking about us, or just changing the subject?”

Later Ifill said about Palin: “Lots of talk about, what, gutting caribou or whatever — I shouldn’t say it this way — gutting caribou in Alaska, which I’m sure is a fine, fine thing to do.” That drew laughter from the audience. “What I’m just saying, we heard a lot more about what Sarah Palin did for sport or what she did as a mother or what she did — than what she did as a governor actually, the actual policy decisions.”

Ifill also raised this point: “This is a weird question, but what don’t we know about Sarah Palin?”

As I already posted, Ifill made at least one error during the debate by injecting her opinion/comment about Biden's positions in the past.

Oh, I understand the concepts of conflict and appearance of impropriety. So, based on that same standard, on your standard, because Tom Brokaw wrote books about the "greatest generation" he should be barred from moderating any debate with someone as old as McCain?

[sharkman]

I'm still waiting. C'mon, Shark, Bush_Cheney. You had to have seen something. The big, bad, east coast liberal media elite must have done something to offend your sensibilities and must have done something to show Gwen was in the tank for Obama. Something. Please. Enlighten us.

This is a clear cut case of conflict of interest. Gwen's bias in the debate would be a separate infraction. If it had been a conservative journalist with a book coming out about Palin, you liberals would have made the same point, and been correct.

I didn't see most of the debate, so I can't comment on her bias, but from your response, it doesn't sound like you saw a problem.

[Guest American Woman]

This is a clear cut case of conflict of interest. Gwen's bias in the debate would be a separate infraction. If it had been a conservative journalist with a book coming out about Palin, you liberals would have made the same point, and been correct.

Try to understand this. The book isn't about Obama any more than it's about Colin Powell, both of whom are in the book. It's about black politics in today's world. But keep trying to drive home a point that has no bearing on reality.

[bush_cheney2004]

Oh, I understand the concepts of conflict and appearance of impropriety. So, based on that same standard, on your standard, because Tom Brokaw wrote books about the "greatest generation" he should be barred from moderating any debate with someone as old as McCain?

Nobody is being "barred" from anything...the CPD debates process is also a closed two party farce. Besides, McCain is not from the "Great Generation". I don't pretend this media circus is anything really meaningful to begin with.

If you think this is "on my standard", then I suspect you do not understand the concepts at all, or are at least favoring one candidate so much (or disliking another) that objectivity no longer applies.

[sharkman]

Try to understand this. The book isn't about Obama any more than it's about Colin Powell, both of whom are in the book. It's about black politics in today's world. But keep trying to drive home a point that has no bearing on reality.

Marketing strategies have much more to do with what's on the cover of the book than what's inside. Putting Obama on the cover is trying to benefit from his potential success.

[Guest American Woman]

Marketing strategies have much more to do with what's on the cover of the book than what's inside. Putting Obama on the cover is trying to benefit from his potential success.

Obama is the most recognizable black man in the present time. According to McCain's ads, he's "the biggest celebrity in the world." So if anything, putting Obama on the cover is trying to benefit from his current enormous popularity, which is not in any way, means, or form "potential," but according to McCain, already a reality.

[Liam]

Nobody is being "barred" from anything...the CPD debates process is also a closed two party farce. Besides, McCain is not from the "Great Generation". I don't pretend this media circus is anything really meaningful to begin with.

If you think this is "on my standard", then I suspect you do not understand the concepts at all, or are at least favoring one candidate so much (or disliking another) that objectivity no longer applies.

Uhh... lighten up, Francis. My statement about McCain was a joke. Jeesh, I'll do finger puppets next time if that helps.

[sharkman]

Obama is the most recognizable black man in the present time. According to McCain's ads, he's "the biggest celebrity in the world." So if anything, putting Obama on the cover is trying to benefit from his current enormous popularity, which is not in any way, means, or form "potential," but according to McCain, already a reality.

Okay, now we are half way there. Picture if you will Obama winning the election. That would be a new peak of success, and having a book coming out with his name on it at the time of his inauguration would boost sales of the book. Nice work if you can get it.

[Liam]

Okay, now we are half way there. Picture if you will Obama winning the election. That would be a new peak of success, and having a book coming out with his name on it at the time of his inauguration would boost sales of the book. Nice work if you can get it.

That's true, but it Ifill also ran a 50-50 risk that having Obama's name on the book cover meant that it could be sold at dollar stores on November 5th if he lost.

[Guest American Woman]

Okay, now we are half way there. Picture if you will Obama winning the election. That would be a new peak of success, and having a book coming out with his name on it at the time of his inauguration would boost sales of the book. Nice work if you can get it.

How could "a new peak of success" top being "the biggest celebrity in the world?" But once again, the book isn't about Obama. It's about black politics in this day and age, and he's just one of the black politicians featured in the book. Remember, "you can't judge a book by it's cover."

[WIP]

So I'm waiting for someone who watched the debate point to evidence of Gwen Ifill's bias based on her performance last night. Anyone?

I see there's still no takers!

Not a surprise, since there was nothing in her management of the debate that Republican diehards could complain about. If anything, she let Sarah Palin get away with too much, by not asking follow up questions and allowing her to give answers that either vaguely connected with the question, or even had nothing to do with the question asked. Imagine what Tim Russert would say in response to: "I'm not going to answer the questions the way you want me to."

Sarahbarracuda got away with her scripted folksy phrases and canned responses, but she still lost the debate in the eyes of anyone who was looking for substance rather than style. Now that she's got a false sense of confidence in her abilities back again, I hope she goes on Meet The Press and gets eaten alive!

[Shady]

I see there's still no takers!

I don't think she showed any bias as moderator of the debate. However, it still doesn't discount the fact that she failed to mention her book to the Commission on Presidential Debates, which presented a clear conflict of interest.

[sharkman]

How could "a new peak of success" top being "the biggest celebrity in the world?" But once again, the book isn't about Obama. It's about black politics in this day and age, and he's just one of the black politicians featured in the book. Remember, "you can't judge a book by it's cover."

I didn't say anything about the biggest celebrity in the world. You are mixing my comments with someone else to get a premise you can work with. at any rate, I think you could agree that Obama winning the presidency would be a new peak of success in his life.

The buying public will be judging the book by its cover. People tend to buy something that makes them feel good. A book with "Age of Obama" on the cover coming out just at the time of his inauguration (if he should win) would help that book sell copies. A smart author would time the release to gain maximum benefit. Nothing wrong with that. However, there is something wrong with not disclosing this tidbit of information to the commission so they can make an informed decision. End of story.

[WIP]

I don't think she showed any bias as moderator of the debate. However, it still doesn't discount the fact that she failed to mention her book to the Commission on Presidential Debates, which presented a clear conflict of interest.

Well, I don't want to sound like a broken record, but the debate format was agreed upon two weeks after the first press release about Gwen Ifill's new book on Barach Obama, so I would say this is a "let the buyer beware" case.

Is there a reason why John McCain, or someone in his staff didn't check for information that was easily available? But, then again, McCain doesn't seem to be much interested in waiting through the tedious process of doing background checks.

[bush_cheney2004]

Uhh... lighten up, Francis. My statement about McCain was a joke. Jeesh, I'll do finger puppets next time if that helps.

I agree...many of your statements are "jokes". Finger that....

[GostHacked]

I didn't say anything about the biggest celebrity in the world. You are mixing my comments with someone else to get a premise you can work with. at any rate, I think you could agree that Obama winning the presidency would be a new peak of success in his life.

And McCain winning the White House won't be a peak of success in his life?

The buying public will be judging the book by its cover. People tend to buy something that makes them feel good.

Hmmm crap this book is garbage, the title and the cover do not reflect the book at all.

A book with "Age of Obama" on the cover coming out just at the time of his inauguration (if he should win) would help that book sell copies. A smart author would time the release to gain maximum benefit. Nothing wrong with that. However, there is something wrong with not disclosing this tidbit of information to the commission so they can make an informed decision. End of story.

Considering most of us have no clue what is really in the book, (that book has yet to be released) and with a title like that, it gives the wrong impression to people. She showed that she can be unbiased just by her performance at the debate as the moderator.

'Alright, neither of you answered the question about what your plans are as VP' ....

Both sides give the best non answeres they can give.

[Shady]

But once again, the book isn't about Obama. It's about black politics in this day and age, and he's just one of the black politicians featured in the book. Remember, "you can't judge a book by it's cover."

To quote a line from one of my favourite movies, how can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate? Obama is the central figure of the book, and his campaign, and political success is the primary substance of her thesis. So enough with your bullcrap. Go shovel it somewhere else.

[GostHacked]

To quote a line from one of my favourite movies, how can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate? Obama is the central figure of the book, and his campaign, and political success is the primary substance of her thesis. So enough with your bullcrap. Go shovel it somewhere else.

So you have read the book then already?? Can I borrow your pre-release copy?? Shovel it indeed.

[Guest American Woman]

To quote a line from one of my favourite movies, how can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate? Obama is the central figure of the book, and his campaign, and political success is the primary substance of her thesis. So enough with your bullcrap. Go shovel it somewhere else.

Obama is the central figure of the book, and his campaign, and political success is the primary substance of her thesis.

Enough of your bullcrap. Site a source for your claim, or shut up.