If you had any questions about how much Thursday's Democrat presidential debate, sponsored by the Clinton News Network, was staged so that Hillary, who had an abysmal two weeks heading into the event, could mount a comeback, they were answered on Sunday's "Late Edition."
During this installment of the CNN program hosted by Wolf Blitzer, White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux actually proclaimed the audience attending the event one of the winners for playing such a significant role.
What did the audience do that was so key in Malveaux's view?
"They booed Senator Edwards, they booed Senator Obama, and really I think kind of framed and changed kind of the tone of the debate" (partial transcript follows, video available here):
You know I think the other winner too was really the audience, because they played such a significant role. I mean, twice they were, uh. They booed Senator Edwards, they booed Senator Obama, and really I think kind of framed and changed kind of the tone of the debate, because you saw Edwards take a back seat after Hillary Clinton went after him on mudslinging. And you saw Obama on the defensive here, and that largely had to do with the role the audience played.
Of course, given how CNN -- or somebody! -- stocked the supposedly undecided audience members that asked questions, one wonders just what percentage of Hillary fans were invited to this event versus those of the other candidates.
Or am I being too cynical?
Post facto question: Given all we're learning about this event, could it go down as the most staged debate in history done so specifically to create an outcome the sponsoring media outlet wanted? If so, is it CNN that was responsible, or the campaign that most benefited?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I guess when you control
November 19, 2007 - 12:07 ET by Airforce_5_OI guess when you control the questions and don't challenge Hillary with a follow up to her waffle she will win. When CNN does a debate with any party you can bet they will slant to their canidate. Watch the next one they do with Repubs and see how easy they go on McCain.
Poodle Blitzer rolled over and got his belly scratched for being a good boy.
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.
What was the warning given to the audience early on..
November 19, 2007 - 12:18 ET by JayTeeBefore the Debate started, didn't the obligatory "warning" to the audience happen by Blitzer ?
I seemed to remember during the 2004 Bush / Kerry debates that the audience was "Warned" twice....to keep it down.
I guess there is no longer a standard, and audience participation in a Debate is "Stocked" for just this type of un-democratic influence. No wonder Hillary doesn't wanna go on Fox, with a truly "un-committed" group Hillary's cackle might receive some laughing from the audience to go along with hers.
So, as published by NB last week, the "Audience Stocking" continues on MSM, Planting Questions is considered necessary.....and they're getting better at it.
It was obvious to the most casual voter watching in TV land.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Sheesh
November 19, 2007 - 12:19 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsIf Hillary needs shielding from even the most innocuous of questions, how does she ever expect to handle hostile foreign leaders, much less run the country?
Looks like it 'takes a village' to run her campaign.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
CNN
November 19, 2007 - 12:21 ET by candanceWe were commenting on that while watching the debate the other night - how the so-called neutral audience was obviously cheering for certain people.
card holding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
Ah! Yes! Let's hear it
November 19, 2007 - 12:24 ET by drillanwrAh! Yes!
Let's hear it for the political Gong Show ...
CRIPES!!!
Jump the Shark
November 19, 2007 - 13:00 ET by Tom PaineThe political process in this country truly jumped the shark when the audience for a political debate became indistinguishable from the studio audience for a taping of Happy Days
Exactamundo!
November 19, 2007 - 14:19 ET by lotrExactamundo!
Performance review...
November 19, 2007 - 12:43 ET by Six String SpiffSomething every hard working American is Subjected to. EXCEPT the MSM. Oh wait, I DID say American. My bad.
Transparent
November 19, 2007 - 12:46 ET by dboIt's pretty obvious that Wolf is gunning for a White House Spokesman job in a Shrillary Government.
The shill
November 19, 2007 - 12:50 ET by KC MulvilleIn the old days, salesmen would place shills in the crowd. Then, after the salesmen made their pitch, the shills would whisper to others in the crowd about what a great product it was. The whisperer would reinforce the sales pitch. The innocent members of the audience, thinking that the whisperer was objective, would then be even more tempted to buy the product.
In this case, CNN apparently stocked the audience with Hillary shills, or prompted individuals to ask Hillary-approved questions. In effect, we are the innocents, and the whole attending crowd acted as one big shill.
Now Malveaux is reinforcing the pitch. She's not whispering, but the effect is the same. She's helping the sales pitch, telling us what a great product Hillary is.
I'm sure CNN was threatened
November 19, 2007 - 13:50 ET by DaBirdI'm sure CNN was threatened with "Clinton accessabilty" before the debate. They layed down like a rug and now they will have their accessabilty. What a joke.
Sorta Like
November 19, 2007 - 19:18 ET by Del DolemonteSorta like the "accessibility" CNN got from Saddam Hussein for the entire time Mrs. Clinton's husband was in the Oral Office?
Kind of off-topic, but not really
November 19, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Hunter12Anyone ever wonder if that spotlight dropping behind the Clintons on 60 Minutes was staged to show Bill in a caring husband role and defuse the Gennifer Flowers scandal?
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
I would concede her point if
November 19, 2007 - 14:09 ET by BruzillaI would concede her point if the audience had booed everyone that threw the mud. Instead they only booed when someone threw mud at Hillary, which even a CNN journalist should be able to recognize as a rigged audience.
Did not see the “rigged
November 19, 2007 - 14:11 ET by maggieqpublicDid not see the “rigged question” portion of the debate, but I did see exchanges that elicited “boos”. My first thought was that the Clinton campaign had instructed their supporters in advance of the debate to jeer and grumble and be boisterous whenever one of Hillary’s opponents so much as started to criticize her.
Malveaux’s contention that the audience was a winner is jaw-dropping. While true on its face, I was under the assumption that debates were supposed to be about the candidates and not the audience. Over many years of debate-watching, I recall moderators instructing the audience to hold applause in order to maximize the time for candidate questions and responses.
Believe it was one of the Daily Kos commenters who compared the scene to a boxing match.
Unfortunately, this all boosts CNN’s ratings. Won’t we all be looking at future CNN debates so as not to miss a possible Jerry Springer-style confrontation?
Barack Hussein Obama and
November 19, 2007 - 14:14 ET by Senior ChiefBarack Hussein Obama and Pretty boy Edwards were booed, because the audience were pre-selected (planted, ring a bell). Again, go ask the Clintons and disprove me...
The Democrat Show
November 19, 2007 - 14:41 ET by third eyeInstead of Wolf Blitzer moderating the debate, Ive come up with an ingenous way to increase ratings for CNN, which requires little effort and much reward. Ok so heres my plan. We put all seven democrat candidates in a small DC townhouse for six weeks filled with cameras, and make them compete for our attention. We will encourage them to behave in a manner consistent with boosting ratings, natuarally. Once a week, at the end of the show, we'll have a text vote on who has to leave the house, with the last one remaining becoming the nominee....Oh the times we would have.
No, Su-zahn, the real
November 19, 2007 - 15:07 ET by fitzfongNo, Su-zahn, the real winners of this Clinton News Network informerical were those who had something better to do with their lives than to watch this orchestrated train wreck. Everyone knew ahead of time that the Clinton News Network was going to do everything possible to give Hillary an image makeover...and you didn't "disappoint". But Hillary didn't come out of this fiasco as a winner, nor did CNN. They just confirmed what everyone knew for all to see...when Hillary goes off the script damaging her campaign, CNN will immediately go into spin mode (telling us what we think) to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Sorry Su-zahn, the egg's broken.
Do ya think...
November 19, 2007 - 16:31 ET by Prester John....that maybe Obama, the Breck Girl and all the others might now be reconsidering their decision not to debate on Fox since they know Fox wouldn't roll to the Clintonistas the way CNN has?
THE LIZARD QUEEN'S MINIONS
November 19, 2007 - 17:40 ET by BERT CONVY*
Face it, the liberal mainstream media are in the bag for The Clintons.
I mean come on, They practically force feed their books to the buying public, making
the glacier and her rapist multi-millionaires, (this from the two so in debt from
Bill's legal fees that a fund raiser had to bail them out), they punted this latest debate with a stacked audience and planted questions while Wolfie Blister tossed softballs to the lizard queen. Gad, how did we come to this, the worst crook to ever occupy the White House (and his harpie wife) are not only not in prison they are the favorite to move back into the very White House they looted the last time they were there? http://www.youtube.c...
America needs an exorcism to rid us of the pure-evil that these two represent.
CLINTONS: DON’T ELECT THEM... JAIL THEM!
*