« Seriously, what's John McCain's problem? | Main | Those who choose to judge, but lack pizazz » More on Gwen Ifill02 Oct 2008 10:00 am Matt thinks that this whole book thing will make Ifill soft on Palin. Of course we have no way of knowing that pre-debate. But I think there's at least as much a chance of Ifill going harder on Palin than going softer. Look, I do my share of MSM-bashing, but I think it's unfair to presume that Ifill will bend here. We like to knock the Washington press corps for falling into the narrative trap, but we should be careful to not fall into that same trap. Besides, as I said before, I think Ifill is one of the last people to go for this. The idea that she sees something to gain in appeasing Michelle Malkin seems unlikely. Comments (22)Comments on this entry have been closed. |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
The idea that she sees something to gain in appeasing Michelle Malkin seems unlikely.
You hit the nail right on the head here. More importantly, nothing Ifill does tonight is likely to appease GOP partisans so why would she bother to try?
Ms. Ifill made a good point: "Do you think they made the same assumptions [the book is an endorsement] about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?" said Ifill, who is black.
I can add this to a list of disappointments I have had regarding race in this election cycle. The good thing is: Obama is going to win.
I sincerely doubt Gwen will go easier. Her reputation is impeccable, and she doesn't seem like the type of journalist who will bend to unreasonable pressure.
Here's the thing--Ifill might pull her punches (assuming she was going to throw any) not because Malkin complained, but because she really is second-guessing her own objectivity. Assuming Ifill is as liberal as everyone is suggesting she is, she's likely (as any good liberal would be) to do her best to be even-handed, even if that means over-compensating to overcome even the tinge of bias.
That said, I think the Couric interview has shown that Palin is in trouble no matter what kind of questions Ifill tosses at her. Hey, I'd be satisfied if Ifill just pulled out the new citizenship test and ran down a list for both of them. See how they do at that.
I don't think Ifill will be much affected. This is just setting up the post-debate narrative, wherein all Palin's flubs will be due to Ifill's obvious bias, even if she asks the two candidates the same question. As Couric did.
Ifill will be unaffected. There are so few good journalists anymore that we instinctively fail to account for professional integrity and assume she can be played.
She is not a sycophant or a self-conscious celebrity; she is a professional and will act like one.
Who cares what Ifill does?
If Biden is smart, every time he speaks he puts forth the Democratic position, contrasting it with a fairly specific and detailed attack on McCain's Senate record.
It is possible that Palin will come to the debate with some prepared half-coherent answers, and maybe even a couple of zingers. There is absolutely *no way* she'll be able to defend McCain from specific attacks on his record.
Ifill shouldn't matter.
Ta-Nehisi:
But she dislikes people like you. It was McCain's campaign that started the nonsense(wingers like Malkin were just repeating the talking points), yet Ifill blames bloggers. See the quote Matt has from her at OpenLeft:
"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job."
As Matt said, she should be blaming the Republican establishment. Not to pick on her though, as she is just like the rest of the Washington punditocracy elite.
In looking at the interviews Palin has given, her first answer is usually just talking points, which usually is enough to not look completely clueless. She gets in trouble when there's any minimum level of follow up that requires her to show any depth of understanding.
My concern is less with Ifill, than with the format of the debate. There just isn't much time for anything but talking points, and Palin will probably look better for it. This controversy is all about trying to characterize the follow-ups as unfair.
A writer from The Nation is live-blogging the debate tonight.
I'm trying to pass this around because, if action meets the talk, it looks like a number of conservatives are descending on his blog tonight.
If it helps, he's going to award Powell's gift cards for good comments.
www.governmentalityblog.com
Gwen Ifill stood up to Don Imus when no one else would. She's tough as nails and smart as hell. The idea that anything the McCain campaign is saying or doing would effect her professionalism is ridiculous. Gwen Ifill will go in there and ask the questions she wrote last week and come off as a woman of integrity and class and intellect, things John McCain and Sarah Palin clearly lack.
i am in the middle of getting my house ready for tonight's party for the "Palin Alive!" show. i gotta run 'cause i'm running over to my local opium market [it's legal here in oil rocks, near baku, for you no-nothing amerikans. see here for your edification: http://www.travel-images.com/az-oilrocks.html]
i just want to say, i know gwen ifill and she's no tom brokaw. all joking aside, mccain operatives have
informed me that they have implanted a bluetooth
receiver deep in her auditory canal
and will provide her with a wealth of of pithy, perky, punky, one line zingers. look for biden to freek from psychotropic put in his diet snapple.
until tomorrow, i remain,
your wahoo in baku, sprue/xxx
I find this whole Ifill nontroversy interesting because of a New York Times article a couple of days ago about Tom Browkaw, who is moderating the next Presidential debate/town hall. Mr. Brokaw is described as being a "liason" between the McCain campaign and NBC, he states that McCain was about to back out of the debate until he heard that Brokaw was moderating, and that he (Brokaw)was instrumental in getting Olbermann and Matthews pulled from anchor duties at MSNBC because he didn't like what they were saying about McCain.
Yet, to my knowledge, outside of the liberal blogs no one questioned if Brokaw would be an impartial moderator of the debate. But Ifill writes a book that talks about the political impact of Obama against the backdrop of the civil rights movement and other African American political figures, and she can't POSSIBLY be impartial.
Really.
John Don Quixote has no windmills left to tilt at. Since the pre-spin is that Gwen Ifill will be hard on his VP pick, she will not disappoint.
Let me preface this by saying I have nothing but respect for Gwen Ifill and I believe she's one of the more credible journalists out there.
Of course Ifill has nothing to gain from appeasing the Malkin crowd. She also has very little to lose by pissing them off either. I love Ifill and think she's one of the more credible journalists out there, but let's face it; she's on PBS. Even if the Republicans can somehow use their manufactured umbrage to create a flap, it's not like PBS is going to start losing advertising dollars when viewers abandon them. I guess the GOP could go after PBS funding, but this is already an annual tradition anyway.
I trust Ifill will do an honest and ethical job moderating the debate.
Damn it, I really need to proof read my sh*t before posting it.
Ifill is a professional. She won't be hard or soft on Palin unless you count treating Palin as she would a serious, qualified vice presidential nominee as hard.
A writer from The Nation is live-blogging the debate tonight.
I'm trying to pass this around because, if action meets the talk, it looks like a number of conservatives are descending on his blog tonight.
If it helps, he's going to award Powell's gift cards for good comments.
http://www.governmentalityblog.com/
Gwen is the media. She knows exactly what this is all about. She ain't sweating none of it.
I'm afraid that, at least subconsciously, Ifill is going to pull up a bit on Palin. In fact, I'd be shocked if she didn't take it easy on her a little bit. Ifill is a very competent journalist, but I suspect she's got to be feeling a bit sheepish about failing to point out explicitly to the McCain folks that "By the way, I've got a book coming out that deals with Sen. Obama in a fundamental way. Are you okay with that?"
It never ceases to amaze me that so often journalists are so self-absorbed that it never occurs to them that even the appearance of a conflict of interest can sabotage the notion of objectivity.
".....Hey, I'd be satisfied if Ifill just pulled out the new citizenship test and ran down a list for both of them. "
What a delicious image. That is exactly how to treat a Fundamentalist, especially in public.
I can't see how the Republican whining about Ifill's bias plays as anything other than whining for just about anyone who isn't part of their bitter-ender base. She might even open the evening with a sneer about whines about her "bias".
Give Gwen a break. She had a lot of ground to cover and not much time to do it. C'mon, she's acting as a debate moderator, not an investigative reporter. Plus, by the rules, this is less a debate than a job review.