Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos actually asked some tough questions of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama during Wednesday's Democrat presidential debate on ABC.
Yet, the Washington Post's television critic Tom Shales wasn't happy about this, and actually felt the event represented "another step downward for network news" wherein the moderators "turned in shoddy, despicable performances."
Ouch.
What follows are some of Shales' key criticisms (emphasis added throughout, picture courtesy NYT):
- The fact is, cable networks CNN and MSNBC both did better jobs with earlier candidate debates. Also, neither of those cable networks, if memory serves, rushed to a commercial break just five minutes into the proceedings, after giving each candidate a tiny, token moment to make an opening statement. Cable news is indeed taking over from network news, and merely by being competent.
- The boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly "World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40 years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation.
Tired tripe? Pardon me, Tom, but since virtually no mainstream media member has dared bring this issue up, how could it be tired?
On the other hand, is it possible Shales' own political leanings were getting in the way of his objectivity? Take a look at how hard the TV critic defended Obama in this piece:
Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said.
He's right on the money, Tom? Media have for decades nay centuries thrived on gaffes during political campaigns. Do you think this is new? Or, is it only distasteful when press members are harping on misstatements by candidates you support?
But I digress:
No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney.
This is precisely what has happened with widely reported comments that Obama made about working-class people "clinging" to religion and guns during these times of cynicism about their federal government.
"It's not the first time I made a misstatement that was mangled up, and it won't be the last," said Obama, with refreshing candor. But candor is dangerous in a national campaign, what with network newsniks waiting for mistakes or foul-ups like dogs panting for treats after performing a trick. The networks' trick is covering an election with as little emphasis on issues as possible, then blaming everyone else for failing to focus on "the issues."
Hmmm. So, in Shales' view, networks covering Obama's statements concerning working-class people in small towns is just a trick? As this was just revealed last Friday, Gibson and Stephanopoulos should have ignored it?
Judging from Shales' conclusion, the answer is "Yes":
To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break.
At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer.
Maybe Shales just preferred the softball questions being asked of these candidates during CNN and MSNBC events...or just liked it better when Obama was being treated by virtually every press outlet in the nation as a rock star.
Those were the good old days, hey Tom?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I love it...
April 17, 2008 - 09:20 ET by AJSHOPEObama is being exposed and his followers are getting so upset that they in turn are being exposed as well. Hooray for Operation Chaos.
Stay in the race Hillary, no matter what anyone else says.
I agree she should stay in
April 17, 2008 - 09:27 ET by mjgI agree she should stay in the race and disrupt the Democrats.
Sniff sniff
April 17, 2008 - 09:20 ET by sunandsteelPoor ol Obama, everybody is just being mean to him. Maybe we should give him a hug.
What doesn’t kill you, only makes you pissed off. -Children of Bodom
Tom Shales: Shameless Leftist Hack
April 17, 2008 - 09:39 ET by AgentAmericanI'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the masses to tear themselves away from American Idol and start a movement to put these leftist hacks on notice.
The groups of Shales' and Olbermann's will continue to permeatethe airwaves, newsprint and cable lines with their deliberate falsehoods until Obama is in office. Tom Shales disgust with Stephanopoulos does not surprise me. The despicable Keith Olbermann needs to go back to jock-sniffing...just saying.
Obama Love Affair
April 17, 2008 - 09:41 ET by GothampcWatching Obama in these debates is like watching Charles Van Doren. Let Fox News have a shot. Oh right, he won't do Fox because he's elitist.
Shales' previous love for Obama in debate...
April 17, 2008 - 09:41 ET by Clay WatersHere's Shales on a previous debate, back on Feb. 27:
Clay Waters
Director of Times Watch
Oh, darn those nutty weathermen bombers!
April 17, 2008 - 09:45 ET by SickofLibsObama associating with a "NUTTY bomb-throwing anarchist?"
Yeah, nutty as in My Favorite Martian's 'nutty' Unce Martin...
...or nutty as in "Even though you were just an innocent passerby, the bomb I planted blew your legs off. But I'm not apologizing."
I can't wait for the real campaign to begin to expose this elitist scumbag's real agenda. I just pray McCain has the gonads to follow thru with what must be done.
"Tired tripe" is the new
April 17, 2008 - 09:45 ET by motherbelt"Tired tripe" is the new smart-alecky euphemism for "We don't care; we don't want to hear it."
You are right that no one has addressed it.
Obama is getting away with it: He was never in church when his pastor said those things... He was 8 years old when Bill Ayers was planting bombs, so being friends with them now is OK. And the MSM smile and go on their merry way.
Does anyone think a Republican would get away with this B as in B, S as in S????
Nixon
April 17, 2008 - 09:50 ET by iveseenitallFunny, the "liberals" never tire of bringing up Nixon or McCarthy from half a century ago. But they have trouble with mentioning Barry's relationship with a Weathermen bomb thrower who, by the way, is still alive. Hillary, Ayers, and Rev. Wrong are 60's leftys and Barry and his wife were indoctrinated in the 80's. Quite legitimate points. Important. Lets's not push them off like Obi-wan's, "nothing to see here".
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal
But these aren't the droids
April 17, 2008 - 15:06 ET by red_dragon311But these aren't the droids we are looking for
"As a news consumer, however, the word of an MSM journalist isn't good enough." - Dabird
I Blame Fox
April 17, 2008 - 09:48 ET by BacchusABC did the job that FOX would have done, had FOX been allowed to participate in the Democratic debates. Someone had to. Kudos to ABC.
Stop It Everyone
April 17, 2008 - 10:01 ET by JoelCT"Why won't everyone just shut up and let us elect Obama for President? Why why why waaaa waaa waaa"
I do not recall Shales' critique when the MSM was hammering Trent Lott about a silly comment at an old fart's birthday party. I do not recall Shales' critique when the MS was hammering the Republicans for giving a speech at a religious university in 2000. I do not recall Shales' critique when President Bush was getting hammered by the MSM about comments to Hugo Chavez by Pat Robertson. I do not recall Shales' critique... <I could go all day but I won't>
Tom, you are pathetic. Truly pathetic. And transparent.
Were those topics asked at
April 17, 2008 - 10:42 ET by balboaWere those topics asked at a presidential debate?
Debated?
April 17, 2008 - 11:28 ET by JoelCTThe Pat Robertson speech happened Aug 22, 2005. If it had happened Aug 22, 2003 it most certainly would have been part of the 2004 debates.
President Bush rebuked Lott immediately, or I am sure it would have been part of the 2004 debates.
I am not sure about the University Speech, but I would put even money it was brought up during at least one of the Presidential debates of 2000.
balb, your question was very Obama-like. Ignore most of the article by Shales, and narrow down to something you can make a point about.
"Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way" - that comment isn't about the debate.
"This is precisely what has happened with widely reported comments that Obama made about working-class people "clinging" to religion and guns during these times of cynicism about their federal government." - that comment isn't about the debate.
"But candor is dangerous in a national campaign, what with network newsniks waiting for mistakes or foul-ups like dogs panting for treats after performing a trick." - that comment isn't about the debate.
My point is that Shales is picking on the MSM for picking on Obama only, and not for picking on anyone else. For everyone else, it is the MSM's job to pick on them.
Yes balboa - I know you said you don't watch them so I'll take
April 17, 2008 - 11:43 ET by Dee Bunkyour question as being truly naive. In the Republican Debates both Romney and Huckabee were asked about religious statements they made that had nothing to do with politics at all and also asked to defend their religions many times. Probably in every debate their religion came up.
Romney, Guliani, McCain & Ron Paul (and probably others) and probably others were all questioned about their associations with different people. Ron Paul was even made to defend the actions of every day supporters of his that he didn't even know.
Every one of the main candidates was question on mis-statements, errors or errors they committed.
As I said before. There is a huge difference between the Rep and Dem Debates and the debate last night was the closest thing to what Republicans get but still much more reserved.
Obama's Middle Name
April 17, 2008 - 10:32 ET by PawpawNAnd what is Barack Obama's middle name? Oh, that's right no one can use it! I think everyone should start now, I'll be first-BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!
What? So someone now is
April 17, 2008 - 10:45 ET by mandrakeWhat? So someone now is responsible for the names their parents put on the birth certificate? My middle name might be Jack...does that me Jack-the-Ripper?
Whats in a name?
April 17, 2008 - 11:15 ET by jpatchHmmm...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Barack really born "Baraka"? Wasn't his name "Baraka Hussein Obama, Jr."? He changed his name to Barack officially later on...obviously he had an interest in "Americanizing" his name. Now he's trying to drop the "Hussein" so us ignant, gun-slinging bible-toting xenophobes won't be scurred away.
Will he ever understand that all people want is honesty? We aren't afraid of that which we know.
Instead, he, his wife, and his spiritual advisor just get all "angry" at anyone that wants to ask about their "character".
jpatch
April 17, 2008 - 11:39 ET by mandrakeSorry, I guess I just don't understand the connection between a persons name and their character. Like we all know that Bob Dylan is not Bob's real name. Does that make him any less American?
Well...
April 17, 2008 - 11:46 ET by jpatchLike I said, I think what people are more concerned with is why Barack seems to be distancing himself from...himself.
And also..."Bob Dylan" isn't running for President, is he? When you're running for the most powerful office in the world, you have to expect and UNDERSTAND the questions about your own character.
People want to read each candidates biography before they vote for them...Barack seems to be under the impression that his "character" has been fully vetted and established.
In the words of ESPN College Gameday's Lee Corso...
"Not so fast my friend!!"
Please that is offensive,
April 17, 2008 - 15:10 ET by red_dragon311Please that is offensive, to who I have no idea, but it's Barak H-word Obama.
and "F" him
"As a news consumer, however, the word of an MSM journalist isn't good enough." - Dabird
Seeing what you want to see
April 17, 2008 - 10:48 ET by KC MulvilleOne thing I want to know: how do you critique a TV debate moderator's "performance?" Moderators ask questions, stare at the candidates while they respond, and that's about it. It isn't like judging figure skating, where there is a list of "compulsories." It's all completely subjective.
"We've already discussed this." Sometimes, multiple questions are just brow-beating, true. But more often, when you keep being asked about a topic, it's because your answer is unsatisfying. Obama keeps being asked about his mis-statements and his associates because his answers are unsatisfying. Except for the media, nobody believes his answers.
"Obama was right on the
April 17, 2008 - 10:50 ET by Chris Norman"Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement..."
Yet wasn't it Obama who mischaracterized McCain's comment about being in Iraq for a long time? Didn't he criticize McCain for flubbing the Iraqi sects?
Well...
April 17, 2008 - 11:34 ET by sunandsteelWe can't go around holding Obama accountable for what he says now can we? Typical white people, geez.
Seriously, this guy whines about the media semi-noticing his remarks and then doing their best to spin it positive for Obama. What would this *kitty* do if, God forbid, he is elected and some real crap starts happening? Oh yeah, whine and moan like a little child.
What doesn’t kill you, only makes you pissed off. -Children of Bodom
Panning the crowd for Obama supporters?
April 17, 2008 - 10:58 ET by Gary HallI love this, NS.
I might suggest that this was proof of Media bias, in support of Obama. After all, had the cameras captured Michelle Obama, the voting public would have had more evidence of her "bitter" (obviously inspired by the Rev. Wright) views on a mean and unproud America, and this would not be good for Obama.
Don't you love how Shale
April 17, 2008 - 12:20 ET by ckc1227Don't you love how Shale implies(by accident, I'm sure) that Obama's association with Ayers happened when Obama was 8 years old?
Yeah, from the way Obama put
April 17, 2008 - 13:15 ET by Chris NormanYeah, from the way Obama put it and Shales related it, it would leave someone uninformed to think Ayers was just a kindly old neighborhood man who'd buy Obama icecream when he was a child.
I fail to see the bad news
April 17, 2008 - 13:24 ET by wiwfI fail to see the bad news in this debate being "slanted against Obama."
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
I just got done watching
April 17, 2008 - 13:27 ET by bigtimerI just got done watching the debate a couple hours ago....Shales obviously must of missed most of it.
For a change I was pleasantly surprised by the great questions...Obama failed miserably....period.
ABC, George and Charlie did a good job.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Hi BT - glad you got to see it.
April 17, 2008 - 14:37 ET by Dee BunkI didn't think Obama handled the questions well either. I thought Hillary did a good job actually and the only thing I think she did that was really bad was she was looking up at the audience a lot and so her eyes moved back and forth which is often a sign that someone isn't telling the truth.
She's never really telling the truth (and neither is Obama) so she knows how to hide it. This really was an attempt I think to connect with the audience there when connecting with the camera was more important.
I was very disappointed that both of them were so firm about their pull out no matter what is happening stances. It's unbelievable that we may very well get a President that thinks that way and they have the nerve to call President Bush Stubborn and divisive.
Hi back at ya Dee... I
April 17, 2008 - 14:50 ET by bigtimerHi back at ya Dee...
I now am hearing Obama criticizing the moderators now...too funny...he did gawd awful, couldn't even handle the capitol gains situation, let alone being upset being asked about his past and present with Wright and Ayers...waaaah waaah waah....and this guy wants to be Pres? He needs to grow up first and foremost.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
BT - Do tell more about Obama's complaints
April 17, 2008 - 14:59 ET by Dee BunkI'm curious.
I've got the television
April 17, 2008 - 15:09 ET by bigtimerDee...
I've got the television down pretty low, anyway I heard Obama saying they talked for 45 minutes about this...45 minutes about that before getting to the war and Iraq ect....in other words he is moaning about the hard quetions he was asked...as if how dare they...and how come you're picking on me, not Hillary?
I'm not turning the TV up for another five minutes...but you can be sure it will be on the Chrissie Show ect....lol!
Me thinks Obama needs a lollipop....and a nap.....
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
OBAMA: MELTDOWN OF A SLICKSTER
April 17, 2008 - 16:13 ET by reelman46OBAMA: MELTDOWN OF A SLICKSTER
Did you witness the responses to some of the “dabate” questions last
nite? You have to be shocked at the inept shifty no-answer answers by
BHO. The lib-media always rigged these events with softballs and
touchy-feeling baloney inquires for decades BUT last nite was exactly
as if two Republicans were being questioned. A couple of lib-media guys
actually put forth relevant questions of national importance plus they
made serious challenges to some recent fuzzy statements by Mr. Fantasy
(BHO). Oh, how this is an eventful year. Even Mrs. Clinton got in a
couple of staggering punches. Its almost like they are real reporters,
real news people after the real truth…quite an amazing refreshing
change. Of course, the reporters got fried by the kook lefty
bloggers…booo hoo “unfair questions”. What a crock. You gotta love the
whole deal. These candidates are not running for some local board so
get down to it.
Obama failed to understand or give a meaningful direct answer to
questions time after time…on Wright, on capital gains, on Ayers, on you
name it. He proved on tape that he is a slickster, a dufus con artist
who shines only when among the least educated singing songs of
victimhood, whistling angry class warfare tunes and humming emotional
socialistic dependence with some else’s money.
He sure appeared angry, flustered and confused about the most basic
inquires and this man wants to lead the USA! Game, set, match.
Can't tie me to something that happened when I was 8 years old
April 17, 2008 - 13:51 ET by MSD6Unfortunately, many Black Americans continue to blame the white man for their plight. Why? Most "typical white people" were not even born before the civil rights act of the 60's and have had no role in the discrimination blacks have suffered. White America has apologied, has guilt and know that crimes were committed against blacks. We have tried to make discrimination a thing of the past, have provided a safety net, and affirmative action to help not only blacks but society as a whole. The vast majority of whites condemn racism of any kind because it's just plain wrong. Obama can't even condemn an unrepented nutty bomb-throwing anarchist because apparently he was only 8 years old. What an excuse. Another example of liberal Obama's double standard. And yes, all 8,000 parishoners should have walked out on Reverand Wright. Some good deeds don't justify promoting hate and racism. It's getting very old.
"promoting hate and racism...it's getting very old."
April 17, 2008 - 14:46 ET by jpatchI couldn't have said it better myself.
Rev. Wright not only promotes, endears, and cultivates "hate and racism", but he also profits from it, quite prodigiously.
And we can see what embracing this philosophy of victimhood and bitterness has given Michelle and Baraka...a $1 million+ per year income, a seat in the United States Senate, fame, and now a chance at the White House.
I can just see the conversation at the meeting table of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"...
"Damn, how did that black family slip through our fingers?!?! How come that man hasn't been addicted to crack or committed a felony yet?! We were off to a good start when his father abandoned him...that saved us the hassle of having to have the police kill his father during a routine traffic stop. But what went wrong from there? They were even in PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!! We had them right in our grasp...how did we f*ck this up gentlemen?!!"
Racism is obsolete. We've all moved on. And when I say "we", I mean the "typical white person", and the "rich white people".
typical politico-speak
April 17, 2008 - 14:17 ET by theduck6No one WAS linking him with the bombings. THEY WERE LINKING HIM WITH THE BOMBER! and the bevy of racist reverends and etc etc etc
Never answer the question asked. Answer the question you want them to ask. Most MSM "journalists" are either too timid to notice they've been used or are all too willing.
BTW. Just like Olberman is a failed sports dud who purports to be a wonk now, how did ubernerd Shales go from being a theatre critic to a pol? I guess if you are bleeting the MSM line, you get ink.
Lighting plays tricks on Charlie
April 17, 2008 - 15:26 ET by nkviking75I just noticed something in the photo. I'm certain it's just a quirk of lighting, but doesn't it look like Charlie Gibson is wearing a bad blackface job?
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Obama, face the fire
April 17, 2008 - 15:31 ET by CobraMan"It's not the first time I made a misstatement that was mangled up, and
it won't be the last," said Obama, with refreshing candor."
It may not be the first time you make that mistake, but it IS the first time you've admitted it.
Hay, Obama, (and all his supporters) when you make a "misstatement," you better be willing to face the consequences of that verbal mistake and stop complaining when people bring it up. It's YOUR mistake, not someone else's. YOU are the only one to blame for that mistake and not anyone else. Stop trying to avoid responsibility and take the heat you deserve for your mistakes. If you're unwilling to face the fire then you'll never be in charge of the cooking, get it? So stop your whining and act like a man.
No dice Cobra.
April 17, 2008 - 15:35 ET by Cool ArrowWhat he says about a demographic group when he thinks it won't get back to them says everything about Obama.
♣ a seal
Obama's new theme song
April 17, 2008 - 16:15 ET by CobraManI know the perfect theme song for Obama‘s campaign:
Fe-fe, fi-fi, fo-fo, fum,
I smell smoke in the auditorium!
Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown.
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown.
He's gonna get caught.
Just you wait and see.
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me?)
Tom Shales, The Clear Obama Sycophant
April 17, 2008 - 18:13 ET by CTWhat a maroon.