"A stage, an audience, a moderator, and at least one presidential candidate."
Robert Gibbs, Obama campaign spokesman, quoted in The Washington Post, on what to expect at Friday's scheduled debate.
Senator John McCain, who has missed voting on 412 bills in the current session of the Senate, wants to delay Friday's presidential debate and meet, along with Senator Obama, with leaders of both Houses of Congress to work on a solution to the financial crisis. Among the 64.1% of floor votes Sen. McCain missed were the F.I.S.A. Amendments Act, 2 energy development funding amendments, and a bill to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as increase education benefits for certain veterans who served after September 11, 2001 (G.I. Bill).
Senator Barack Obama, who missed 295 votes, many of them during a prolonged primary contest with Sen. Hillary Clinton, has rejected the proposal to delay the debate.
The Trail, A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008 in The Washington Post also reports that the Commission on Presidential Debates said that it is "moving forward with its plan for the first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, MS, this Friday, September 26," despite the McCain announcement. "We believe the public will be well served by having all of the debates go forward as scheduled," the Commission said.
Update: Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic reports that "A senior (McCain) campaign official says that McCain will NOT debate -- no matter what -- if Congress hasn't reached an agreement on a bailout package."
Chris Cillizza opines in The Washington Post that "The move is an obvious attempt by McCain and his campaign to paint the Arizona senator as above politics, willing to put aside his campaign for the good of the country."
Showing posts with label debates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debates. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Post-Convention Wisdom
Was the volume of journalists covering the recent Democratic and Republican party conventions the best use of news gathering resources? If the objective was to provide citizens with information they need to cast an informed vote, they could have put their time to better use. That's the position of Jeff Jarvis, director of the interactive journalism program at the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism.
Jarvis recently wrote that "Politics is the opiate of journalism and it's time to go to rehab." Excerpt:
Four years ago, the Poynter Institute's Al Tompkins asked PBS News anchor Jim Lehrer "why, in these days of few surprises at national conventions, it is still worthwhile to cover them." Lehrer's answer might be summed up in this paragraph from his response:
More people watched the speeches by presidential candidates Obama and McCain, and vice presidential candidate Palin, than the finale of American Idol. Those numbers were swelled by low-information voters of both parties. The conventions told them who to cheer for, but many don't know enough about the candidates' policies to cast an informed vote.
The second of the "few 'shared' national political events" Jim Lehrer mentioned is the debates. It is crucial that the moderators elevate their game above the will you pledge tonight silliness that diminished the primary debates. If they don't, the candidates should assert themselves to make their positions clear.
Obama and McCain each have website pages that address many important issues. But, television is likely to guide more voters than the internet. Either way, I agree with Jeff Jarvis that journalists should invest more time covering the actions of our government. That would be one step towards making this the last most critical presidential election of our lifetime.
Jarvis recently wrote that "Politics is the opiate of journalism and it's time to go to rehab." Excerpt:
The attention given to the conventions and campaigns is symptomatic of a worse journalistic disease: we over-cover politics and under-cover the actions of our governments. We over-cover politicians and under-cover the lives and needs of citizens. . . .
Four years ago, the Poynter Institute's Al Tompkins asked PBS News anchor Jim Lehrer "why, in these days of few surprises at national conventions, it is still worthwhile to cover them." Lehrer's answer might be summed up in this paragraph from his response:
The political conventions are among the few "shared" national political events left. The others are the debates. Journalism organizations that say the conventions are not important are essentially saying the election of a president is not important. We are not in the business of making events, only in covering them.
More people watched the speeches by presidential candidates Obama and McCain, and vice presidential candidate Palin, than the finale of American Idol. Those numbers were swelled by low-information voters of both parties. The conventions told them who to cheer for, but many don't know enough about the candidates' policies to cast an informed vote.
The second of the "few 'shared' national political events" Jim Lehrer mentioned is the debates. It is crucial that the moderators elevate their game above the will you pledge tonight silliness that diminished the primary debates. If they don't, the candidates should assert themselves to make their positions clear.
Obama and McCain each have website pages that address many important issues. But, television is likely to guide more voters than the internet. Either way, I agree with Jeff Jarvis that journalists should invest more time covering the actions of our government. That would be one step towards making this the last most critical presidential election of our lifetime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
