David Broder of the Washington Post recently wrote an editorial "Sound and Fury, Signifying a Debate," concerning the last Democratic debate in Las Vegas. The thrust of Mr. Broder's article was that the debate moderators are so eager for headlines, they rarely pause to ask the candidates for evidence to support their opinions or assertions. As I've stated in the past, I agree with Mr. Broder on this issue.
However, Mr. Broder has the same problem as the moderators because when he appears on many cable shows, he speaks about candidates' positions but fails to tell the full story himself. A prime example is promoting Republican talking points on national security as if they were fact, but not following up with any evidence to support his claims. Mr. Broder has done that several times just within the past few months.
Mr. Broder was also one of many journalists who never sought evidence to back up the claim that Iraq had WMD stockpiled and ready to use against America or transferred to terrorists as the President and other Republicans asserted. Yet he says moderators don't seek evidence from candidates to support their opinions. Mr. Broder is guilty of the same thing.
Mr. Broder ends his editorial in these words, "can't these debates be rescued." The answer is of course they can, but they won't because journalists and the media put hype, spin, and show business first. What Mr. Broder should be asking is when will the candidates face questions about the 20 years of record deficit spending by the Reagan-Bush and George W. Bush administrations. Mr. Broder does not have to wait for the moderators to address that and other issues. He writes an editorial column; he can write about anything any time he wants to.
No comments :
Post a Comment