Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Did Gwen Ifill show bias in last night’s debate?

posted at 1:10 pm on October 3, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view

The selection of Gwen Ifill as moderator for the VP debate last night generated a lot of controversy in light of her upcoming book on “The Age of Obama” — but did she actually show any bias in the debate?  It seemed to me that Ifill was on her best behavior during the debate, perhaps cognizant of the scrutiny she received over the preceding two days.  In speaking to a few of the people at Trocadero’s, no one could point to any particular bias or even sense of bias from Ifill in the few minutes following the debate.

This morning, though, I received several e-mails that claimed Ifill gave Joe Biden the last word on topics much more often than she gave to Sarah Palin.  I didn’t recall that, and I was actually considering that as a potential issue while watching the debate.  I consulted the transcript at the LA Times Top of the Ticket blog and counted them myself.  In 20 changes of topic, both candidates got 10 last words.  Biden got to deliver his closing statement after Palin, but that’s hardly a “last word” situation, and I believe that’s arranged prior to the debate.

Jim Geraghty scolds Ifill for not disclosing her conflict of interest at the start of the debate:

Gwen Ifill’s questions were not glaringly biased, but it was ridiculous that she didn’t feel the need to acknowledge her book on “The Age of Obama” at the beginning of the debate. It was the third time in this process that she has behaved dishonorably. The first was not disclosing the book to the Commission on Presidential Debates. The second was dismissing the criticism out of hand, and not acknowledging that debate moderators ought to not have a financial incentive to see one side win. And thirdly by refusing to acknowledge these facts during the debate, information that the viewers at home are entitled to take into consideration.

I consider the lack of disclosure to the CPD the most glaring ethical failure here.  I also would have liked to hear Ifill disclose the book in the beginning of the debate, as I’m almost certain that most of the audience had no idea of her financial interest in the outcome of the election.  Like Jim, I consider that a separate issue to the actual performance.

Ace, though, says the selection of the questions showed Ifill’s bias.  Ifill asked no questions on gun control, for instance, and that was a topic on which Barack Obama and Biden have disagreed.  No questions on abortion, either, and only the most tangential question about energy (climate change), which Palin had to seize upon in order to discuss the broader energy policy she and McCain promote.  And Ifill never asked a single question about earmarks, which let Biden and his $50+ million of 2009 requests off the hook.

In fact, here were the topics:

  1. Bailout bill
  2. How to reduce polarization in Washington.
  3. Subprime lending meltdown.
  4. Taxes.
  5. What spending from the platforms will have to be put off with the financial crisis?
  6. 2007 Bankruptcy bill.
  7. Climate change: real?  Causes?
  8. Same-sex benefits, gay marriage.
  9. Exit strategy in Iraq.
  10. Iran, Pakistan.
  11. Diplomacy (Kissinger question).
  12. Israel-Palestinian conflict.
  13. Afghanistan.
  14. Interventionism.
  15. How do you disagree with your running mates?
  16. What does a vice-president do?
  17. Is the VP part of the Executive Branch?
  18. What is your Achilles’ Heel?
  19. What is an issue on which you’ve changed your mind?

I would say that the questions leaned strongly in Biden’s direction, and ignored most of the McCain/Palin argument.  The wonder is that Biden didn’t do more with the assistance, and that Palin overcame it.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

I thought she did a good job and showed no bias at all. Of course this only because she knew all eyes were on her for any incling of bias, she was a lame duck, thank God.

Geronimo on October 3, 2008 at 1:14 PM

The only time I wish Ifill had spoken up was on the question of differences with the top of the ticket.

Biden talked about how great Obama was, and had no differences. I wish she had just chimed in and asked for “differences”. Palin named specifics things where she differs from McCain.

But I think she did a very good job.

Abby Adams on October 3, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Is it possible that the McCain camp knew about Ifill’s book and leaked it at the last second to force her to behave more neutrally that she would have otherwise?

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Ace, though, says the selection of the questions showed Ifill’s bias.

As expected.

I would say that the questions leaned strongly in Biden’s direction, and ignored most of the McCain/Palin argument. The wonder is that Biden didn’t do more with the assistance, and that Palin overcame it.

I agree.

Palin did a great job. It would be nice if Biden were truly held accountable for all the lies he told last night, but even if he isn’t, she did very well putting across the positions of her ticket and speaking directly to the American people.

Y-not on October 3, 2008 at 1:15 PM

She did let Biden have more last words but I am not sure that was kind to Joe Biden.

Elizabetty on October 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM

I think that the pre-debate publicity of her book resulted in a fairer debate. I agree with Ace’s contention, however, that her decision to stay away from issues which would assist the McCain/Palin ticket is indicia of bias. But a very clever bias.

HawaiiLwyr on October 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM

She was pretty fair over all, but if you listen closely, you can hear how she leans toward Biden.

15. How do you disagree with your running mates?

Palin: “ANWR, but I’ll keep workin’ on him.” (wink)

Loved it!

Tony737 on October 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Ed,
I guess we’d have to compare your list to a list put together by a conservative debate moderator.

Oh wait….

hippie_chucker on October 3, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Tony737 on October 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM

That wink was for me, so don’t get any ideas.

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Of course she’s “in the tank” for The One, but compared to the moronic questions in the debate moderated by Matthews and Politico, it wasn’t bad.

aquaviva on October 3, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Well I have only seen Ifill a few times & have never been extremely impressed with her. *Does that make me racist?!*
Her topics were really LAME.
I was hoping for some great stuff & all we got was mealy mouthed crap to stew about.
Biden was just slick bcs of all his speeches (speeches do nothing for me. I need results-but I guess many of the American people just like cool speeches) in Congress over the years.
I think Palin did the best with what she had.
It’s absolutely DISGRACEFUL that Ifill didn’t disclose her personal interest. I will never take this woman seriously.
I think she avoided earmarks PRECISELY bcs she knew Biden would tank on that one.

Badger40 on October 3, 2008 at 1:18 PM

My guess is that she sensed that Biden was getting spanked and so, at question 15, she switched to open ended questions to allow Biden to spew talking points.

Biden lost every round until round 15.

faraway on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I thought Ifill did fine. I think any complaining would be nitpicking, counterproductive and akin to crying wolf.

YellowDawg on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I wish she had said something like “John doesnt realize that ANWR isn’t exactly Yellowstone, its just a large field populated by mosquitoes”.

hippie_chucker on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Of course she was biased. I loved the end when she leaned into Biden after the debate to congratulate him on his performance, unaware that the mic picked the whole thing up.

awake on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

i have to admit i saw nothing glaring — but i put that down as being due to the fact that the book kerfuffle had BLANKETED the airwaves the 24 hrs. prior so that many a joe and mary q public knew the score …

/once again, duh1 playin’ checkers and John playin’ chess …

Buckaroo on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

The topics she chose helped her favorite candidate, but Ifill asked those questions in a fair manner.

Rush Limbaugh needs to moderate a future debate to provide fairness and balance.

Right_of_Attila on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

And then there was the end where Ifill told Joe he did a good job and she thought he won the debate. Oh no, there was no bias! LOL! I thought she did come across as testy with Palin. She did try to help Joe or prod him to go in the right direction. I remember at least twice I think where Joe said his light was blinking and he was about to run out of time and he continued to speak well beyond when he should have stopped or been stopped.

freeus on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Which one were the questions skewed in either side’s favor? And how so?

Trent1289 on October 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM

No complaints here. Ifill was professional enough to play it down the middle. Job well done.

LimeyGeek on October 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM

That wink was for me, so don’t get any ideas.

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Wanna fight about it?

She was totally winking at me!

lorien1973 on October 3, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Good post, Ed.

It was subtle, but it was definitely there. The irony is that Palin’s strong performance and willingness to give her answers instead of the ones Ifill was seeking maksed the bias even more. That should provide two lessons:

1) That Republicans can still get their message out even with the MSM in the tank for Obama; and

2) That those on the right that are repeating the MSM narrative are dumb, cowardly, or both.

thirteen28 on October 3, 2008 at 1:22 PM

I think that Gwen gave Biden too much room concerning many of the questions and then let him intergect, before Sarah was finished totally.

Gwen wasn’t rude about it, very diplomatic. But I was not happy with one question in particular which was aimed for Biden.

What spending from the platforms will have to be put off with the financial crisis?

This was wrong, since Sarah had NOTING to do with or concerning this. Ticked me off!

other then the questions were pretty liberal.. Gwen was ok I guess.

upinak on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

I did not see a Bias per se but it sure seemed like Biden averaged about 15 seconds longer to speak each time….

Plus, with the potential of easily 3 new Justices in the next 4 years, why on earth was Abortion not brought up???/ Oh, that’s right, she is biased and did not want Mr. Excommunicated to redefine the Bible again….much like Hezbollah and the Constitution….

SDarchitect on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

“lorien1973 on October 3, 2008 at 1:22 PM”

the winking snark is now officially old news …

/jus’ sayin’ …

Buckaroo on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

you guys are nuts, Cuda winked at me….I could tell!

SDarchitect on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

How do you disagree with your running mates?
What does a vice-president do?
Is the VP part of the Executive Branch?

These three questions were biased in my viewpoint.

1st allowed Biden talking points, and to allow him to say, even though other previous statements contradicted, he bowed to the Wisdom of THE ONE.

2nd was a reminder of a Dem attack on a out of context Palin answer.

3rd allowed a direct attack on VP Cheney… and the administration.

Romeo13 on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

I was surprised not to detect bias during the debate. Afterward, though, I thought Ifill tried to make Palin look like Biden (”stand up Charlie, oh, what am I talking about, God love ya…) by loudly telling Palin “I can’t get up.” Palin loudly responded, “I know” and I think diffused the attempt to make her look bad.

Looking at the list of topics afterward, it does appear the questions favored the Hussein-Robinette ticket, somewhat, but overall Ifill was on her best behavior.

NTWR on October 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM

I agree with Geronimo. Ifill did a competent and professional job. Considering this was the only VP debate scheduled, she had a lot of ground to cover, so to complain about her selection of questions is awfully petty, regardless of whether it’s true. McCain’s point that “life’s not fair” was apt and showed class, and I think that’s the right way to approach this. Any deficiencies in Ifill’s performance were minor and not substantial enough to be construed as a lack of objectivity.

Most importantly, complaining about what was a largely objective performance diminishes the very real and valid criticisms of the media in other circumstances. We can’t afford to look like the boy who cried wolf when it comes to media bias.

Caiwyn on October 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM

That wink was for me, so don’t get any ideas.

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Wanna fight about it?

She was totally winking at me!

lorien1973 on October 3, 2008 at 1:22 PM

She was only winking at you two to make me jealous.

Geronimo on October 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Definitely.

She fired positive softball questions at Biden and negative hardball questions at Palin.

C’mon, what kind of question is:

What does a vice-president do?

If not so Gwen can bring up Palin’s quote and rub it in her face?

The USUAL question for this is: What would you as a vice-President do?

Skywise on October 3, 2008 at 1:25 PM

OT, sorta:

Rush just mentioned that McCain is out praising Al Gore’s global warming work, and that McCain respects Al Gore and will seek his advice.

Good think Ifill didn’t ask about that.

Just Manny Maverick being Maverick.

JiangxiDad on October 3, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Did Gwen Ifill show bias in last night’s debate?

Does the sun rise in the east?

Nahanni on October 3, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Which one were the questions skewed in either side’s favor? And how so?

Trent1289 on October 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM

THE travesty was not so much in the questions asked but in the questions that were unasked: most importantly for me, energy, and less so, abortion. These two topics are huge advantages for Palin and albatrosses for obama/biden. The omission is glaring in that they are very important issues to the voters.

jdpaz on October 3, 2008 at 1:28 PM

Allowing her be the moderator considering the circumstances set a bad precedent, however she did a good job.

I believe she felt a little extra pressure to be fair.

Dorvillian on October 3, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Gun control would have been a logical question, as well as earmarks, other then that I think Ifill did a good job.
You can read anything into most anything, but in this case Ifill was a pretty good moderator, but then I would love to have seen her original list of questions before the “blow up”.

right2bright on October 3, 2008 at 1:31 PM

3rd allowed a direct attack on VP Cheney… and the administration.

Romeo13 on October 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM

I noticed that one in particular and figured Gwen is still stinging from the Cheney/Edwards debate she moderated.
Which brings me to a point I don’t know if anyone has brought up.
She moderated the VP debate in 2004. She should not have moderated again. We have different candidates and should have had a different moderator.

Brat on October 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM

She started with Biden more times than Palin. It seemed kind biased in some ways

ConservativePartyNow on October 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM

THE travesty was not so much in the questions asked but in the questions that were unasked:

Exactly. Part of the larger problem with the pro-Obama media coverage is the issues that they won’t talk about — Wright, Ayers, Rezko etc.

CanadianGuy on October 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM

She started with Biden more times than Palin. It seemed kind biased in some ways

ConservativePartyNow on October 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM

That was only biased in that by the time Biden finished his answer, no one could remember what the question was.

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Which one were the questions skewed in either side’s favor? And how so?

Trent1289 on October 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM

The point is that the selection of topics was weighted toward areas in which Biden has more experience (5 questions on foreign policy, for example) whereas other topics (government reform, energy policy) where Palin has more experience were skipped. (Asking non-scientists about climate change is silly, imho. I am a scientist and I personally know scientists who disagree about this issue – environmental scientists tend to believe in it; earth scientists (geophysicists) tend to not. What will a politician’s view add to that debate? A more relevant question should involve policies to achieve energy independence, an area in which Palin is expert and one which McCain has stated would be a primary area for her as VP in his administration.)

I thought having same-sex marriage as the sole question on social issues was a little odd. Clearly Ifill wanted to avoid the topic (abortion) where Obama and Biden have weaknesses (Obama on the “live birth” bill; Biden on being reprimanded by the leaders of the Catholic Church).

Y-not on October 3, 2008 at 1:35 PM

There were times when I thought Biden knew the question before she finished asking it, and his answers seemed totally prepared.
Nah, Gwen wouldn’t have leaked them to him or Barry’s campaign, WOULD SHE? Could she have mistakenly e-mailed them to Michelle O.? Nah.

Brat on October 3, 2008 at 1:36 PM

She should have pressed Biden on his ‘we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon’ gaffe.

Otherwise she seemed somewhat neutral.

Urban Infidel on October 3, 2008 at 1:37 PM

I didn’t notice any bias in her behavior, but yes there was a bias in the mix of questions. No doubt about that. She was biased in her mix of questions.

Sapwolf on October 3, 2008 at 1:39 PM

All these moderators are making more than $250,000, and hence would see their taxes raised under Obama. They all have a financial interest in a McCain/Palin win.

factoid on October 3, 2008 at 1:40 PM

ernesto on October 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM

The omission of the abortion issue was huge. I was very surprised.

But that would have resulted in “can open, worms everywhere”.

nyrofan on October 3, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Biden got to deliver his closing statement after Palin, but that’s hardly a “last word” situation, and I believe that’s arranged prior to the debate.

I’d say that was actually a negative for him. I didn’t watch the debate live. I had it recorded. AT&T even gave the event an extra three minutes but it still cut Biden off about halfway through his closing.

I don’t know if many other people recorded it as I did, but any who did missed the rest of his speech just like I did.

Esthier on October 3, 2008 at 1:43 PM

McCain challenged Obama to do a series of townhall meetings. He declined. Sarah should now challenge Biden to a series of debates in any format he chooses. That would cement in everyone mind who won and would do so convincingly.

meci on October 3, 2008 at 1:47 PM

The selection of questions was the place where Ifill’s bias showed.

I noticed two in particular that were clearly engineered to emphasize Democratic talking points:

1) The question regarding how a Palin administration would differ from a McCain administration, or a Biden administration from an Obama administration. It was based on the favorite Democratic meme, “a heartbeat away from the Presidency.” This naturally favors the Democrat this year.

2) The question regarding the candidate’s opinion regarding Dick Cheney’s view of the Vice Presidency being both legislative and executive branch. This was an obscure, technical question asked in the hopes of producing another Palin blank-out, and recalls the instance when Gov. Palin wondered out loud what a Vice President does.

I think it’s time we stopped accepting the fact that this sort of partisanship is just something we Republicans have to put up with. I’m in favor of public demonstrations. Ifill should go.

philwynk on October 3, 2008 at 1:51 PM

All these moderators are making more than $250,000, and hence would see their taxes raised under Obama. They all have a financial interest in a McCain/Palin win.

factoid on October 3, 2008 at 1:40 PM

They are also members of the MSM and are looking forward to an Obama administration that will crush opposition media.

They have high salaries, but they are not running businesses. Business owners are the ones who will really suffer on O!’s administration.

Y-not on October 3, 2008 at 1:51 PM

By coin flip Biden received the first question.
.
.
He also received the final comment.
.
.
Bias? Dunno. Strange? Yes.

subbottomfeeder on October 3, 2008 at 1:55 PM

She was fine. I will bet dollars to donuts that Bob Schieffer won’t be nearly as fair in the last one.

Mr. D on October 3, 2008 at 1:58 PM

Hmmm… the more I think about it, maybe there should have been a question on abortion. It’s been a high-profile issue since Biden is Catholic, and obviously Palin’s position on it. I’m not as sold on the need for a question about gun control, though.

Pro-life, pro-family, pro-Palin.

Abby Adams on October 3, 2008 at 1:58 PM

She cut Palin off several times, just as she was hitting her stride — but I’m not sure whether that’s a sign of bias.

I read a comment somewhere suggesting that Biden was given more time to talk and that Palin was cut off well before her time should have ended several times.

Without going back through the debate with a stopwatch, however, I don’t know if that’ true.

Found it: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2096584/posts

Again, haven’t confirmed the comments, but if true they’d be pretty egregious, though not necessarily obvious to the casual observer.

ClintACK on October 3, 2008 at 1:58 PM

I thought that where Ifill showed bias was in repeatedly soliciting and allowing Biden to have the “last word” on question segments. I thought her question selections were a little goofy but not really in an “unfair” or “hit” kind of way.

Outlander on October 3, 2008 at 2:00 PM

I think Ifill did a good job – considering.

As for Ace, I think thy protest too much.

I saw no problems with the questions and whether Biden was given more time is debatable.

If anything some of the questions showed ignorance on Biden’s part.

pocomoco on October 3, 2008 at 2:02 PM

Ifill has been reading Ed’s posts on abortion.

Imagine Biden walking through that minefield with Catholics and archbishops across the country watching. Imagine Biden trying to defend Obama’s position. And imagine the opponent is Sarah Palin.

Biden would have soiled his shorts. We’d have seen some real crying.

Ifill gave Obama’s campaign a complete pass. Sure, it may come up in a McCain-Obama debate, but McCain isn’t the mother of a Down Syndrome child and Obama doesn’t have the archbishops breathing down his neck.

BuckeyeSam on October 3, 2008 at 2:02 PM

The questions were lame, but Ifill was better behaved than the MSM as a whole. The criticism put her on notice and she got the message enough to squall raaaacism in a soft PBSy voice.

I’d have no objection at all to them having their Ifills if we could have our Coulters.

Feedie on October 3, 2008 at 2:04 PM

Its all in the questions that she DID NOT ASK BIDEN.

Such as :

Please defend your NO vote on the Alaskan pipeline 30 years ago.

Or, Please contrast the experience of Obama with Palin.

Dpet on October 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM

My father-in-law, a staunch Democrat, called me last night from Missouri, and expressed his amazement of how well he thought Governor Palin did. We have been working on him to realize that his party has left him. It has been taken over by the far left liberals, from an unethical Chicago thug culture. He is seeing the light, and will vote McCain/Palin this year. It will be the first time he has crossed party lines to vote for what is right for America. If more stories like this are happening across the US, November 4th could be interesting indeed.

Kevin in Washington State on October 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Subtle and unsubtle favoritism

It’s common if one has a graduate student about to undergo the oral exam to try to direct the questions to that student’s strengths. That’s what happened here: the moderator steered strongly away from areas where Palin’s positions are really America’s positions, and toward areas where the left either cares deeply or not at all and most normal people have no strong positions.

That kind of thing can be pretty subtle and, in fact, most people don’t notice because most people don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what questions should be asked.

The less subtle but more important issue, to me, is how many of the questions Biden’s people know in advance. In many cases his answers looked rehearsed more than ex tempore – now it’s quite likely that debate prep staff can correctly guess some questions, or at least their direction and focus, but it seemed to happen too often yesterday.

Paul Murphy on October 3, 2008 at 2:12 PM

… add to it the sheer number of last comments/rebuttals he got. Although, I don’t know if that’s the moderator’s fault or Gov. Palin’s for not demanding more.

eforhan on October 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM

I thought Ifill’s questions were reasonably fair, and that she didn’t intervene much, or badger the candidates if they went off-topic (which both of them did). Given Ifill’s book deal, it could have been a lot worse.

I did have a hunch that Biden got more speaking time than Palin. Could somebody check the tape and verify this?

How about the next debate moderated by Laura Ingraham?

Steve Z on October 3, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Kevin in Washington State on October 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Reagan had a quote before the 1980 election where he was talking to the Democrats that he was asking to cross-over and vote for him. I’m paraphrasing, but, it went something like this:

“It was a real struggle for me the first time a pulled the lever for a Republican. About three seconds later I felt great and I’ve never regretted it since.”

Just keep reminding your dad and folks like him (as you have been) that they are not leaving their party, the party left them. You’ll never feel bad after voting if you vote your conscience.

JadeNYU on October 3, 2008 at 2:20 PM

IFILL: OK, our time is up here. We’ve got to move to the next question. Sen. Biden, we want to talk about taxes, let’s talk about taxes. You proposed raising taxes on people who earn over $250,000 a year. The question for you is, why is that not class warfare and the same question for you, Gov. Palin, is you have proposed a tax employer health benefits which some studies say would actually throw five million more people onto the roles of the uninsured. I want to know why that isn’t taking things out on the poor, starting with you, Sen. Biden.

you have to be blind to not see the bias in that question. its basically asking biden how they are gonna help the downtrodden by making greedy evil rich people pay their share and then asking palin why mccain wants mandatory executions for all people w/ less than 5million in the bank.

chasdal on October 3, 2008 at 2:21 PM

OK, no one else around here seems to have heard this but me:

Afterward, though, I thought Ifill tried to make Palin look like Biden (”stand up Charlie, oh, what am I talking about, God love ya…) by loudly telling Palin “I can’t get up.” Palin loudly responded, “I know” and I think diffused the attempt to make her look bad.

Did any of you catch that or was I just inebriated at that point?

NTWR on October 3, 2008 at 2:21 PM

Yes, perhaps a little, but I think it was the reflection of her own inner choices more than anything deliberate. I thought that, all in all, she did a pretty good job. And Sarah did an absolutely wonderful job, bless her.

jeanie on October 3, 2008 at 2:27 PM

With the conflict of interest by Ifell she took away from the debate because of the cloud hanging over her. The debate should not have had this inference.

Wade on October 3, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Is it possible that the McCain camp knew about Ifill’s book and leaked it at the last second to force her to behave more neutrally that she would have otherwise?

Dead Hand Control on October 3, 2008 at 1:15 PM

No. Even I knew about the book, weeks ago. I posted about here (or on LGF)…it’s been public knowledge for a while now.

capitalist piglet on October 3, 2008 at 2:35 PM

She was only winking at you two to make me jealous.

Geronimo on October 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM

I felt that wink down to my toes.

fossten on October 3, 2008 at 2:37 PM

I did hear Ifill tell Biden “You did a great job” at the end of the debate, after Palin had thanked her at her desk and walked away.

Funny, didn’t hear her Ifill tell Palin that.

Blue-eyed Infidel on October 3, 2008 at 2:38 PM

It’s settled: No ethics violations here.

dont taze me bro on October 3, 2008 at 2:44 PM

These days I assume that if they’re not chanting some anti Bush stuff out loud they’re doing a pretty good job.

Buzzy on October 3, 2008 at 2:45 PM

I can’t help but think that if the tables had been turned and the moderator had been a known conservative with a book coming out about McCain, well for one I don’t think the debate would have happened. The dems would have refused to do it. And if they had, today they’d be so shrill it’d be unbelievable. Are we totally used to this type of bias, or just way more stoic than the dems?

4shoes on October 3, 2008 at 2:46 PM

She cut Palin off several times, just as she was hitting her stride — but I’m not sure whether that’s a sign of bias.

Oh yeah. Your first goal as a person who has book sales riding on the outcome is to try to abruptly knock the target candidate off of her stride as early in the debate as possible. You want a key point where you feel momentum shifting in her direction, especially if powerful points are being scored for McCain at the head of the ticket. Then the interruption needs to appear legitimate (I doubt in this case it was, for it seemed unnatural and panicked) If not called on it, then it’s a win-win-win-win where you blunt their specific message at that moment, break momentum, possibly fluster them for a while, potentially darken their mood for the whole evening by sending a powerful message of your arbitrary control…and of course sell more books!

IFILL DID THAT PERFECTLY. Roll the clip. It appears she was only able to do damage control for Obama in this case, but we don’t know how being able to finish that sentence would have propelled Palin mentally.

Basically Ifill’s bias throughout the night was the equivalent of subtle yet clear racial bias – which of course is partly what it is. She has a stake in a book about a black president because of the novelty of his partial blackness. A 100% white president isn’t going to lead her to write her book about the “Age of McCain.”

econavenger on October 3, 2008 at 2:48 PM

I thought her topics were lame. Ifill has never impressed me as being anything other than mediocre and now she’s dishonest and mediocre. However, the country being what it has become she’ll thrive and prosper, without fear of being challenged. In a few years, she’ll retire with accolades and outrageous claims of superiority that she never attained in her entire career. Then hopefully she’ll fade into obscurity. Her true legacy will be damage to her craft with a lowering of standards and lack of integrity.

UnEasyRider on October 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM

The interesting thing is that people are naturally unaware of their own bias. The trick of it is this, if you don’t understand the position in which you disagree with, how can you acurately prevent yourself from speaking against it? You can’t. But this doesn’t stop man’s naturally arrogant mind from thinking that his/her intelligence or experience has enough information to be completely objective and impartial.

So when someone who disagrees with you says, “Come and let’s talk on neutral ground.” Don’t assume that the ground is truly neutral.

shick on October 3, 2008 at 3:16 PM

By avoiding Palin’s strongest issues – energy, life, reform – Ifill’s bias is certainly no mystery today.

T J Green on October 3, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Gas prices have been at record levels, the South has a gas shortage, production of biofuels has driven up food prices worldwide and some countries have had food riots. If these aren’t critical issues, what are? I waited in vain for the questions about energy policy.

obladioblada on October 3, 2008 at 4:06 PM

subbottomfeeder on October 3, 2008 at 1:55 PM

I picked up on that too. A little biased to give someone the first question and the last response.

Overall though, I’d give Ifill a B+ on form, and a D- on ethics.

Tennman on October 3, 2008 at 4:19 PM

The issue of topic selection is a serious one. Most of the criticism of Gov. Palin’s experience revolves around he perceived (or at least the media generated perception) that she is inexperienced in foreign policy. Sen. Biden’s “claim to fame” is supposedly foreign policy.

Even if Gov.Palin is weak on international relations, fine. Her strengths are energy policy and taxation, government reform and (let’s say for fun) executive decision making.Sen. Biden has some experience in taxation, though from the “imposing them on working people” perspective, rather than the “reducing them to promote productivity and generate revenue” perspective.

It seems to me that a large focus on foreign affairs and less on the taxation and energy (a huge issue) issues…let alone government reform…is in itself a manifestation of bias and an effort to skew the debate in favour of Sen. Biden.

That Gov. Palin overcame this is a fine tribute to her abilities.

Blaise on October 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM

I’d say if there were any bias, Palin took charge of any hint of it and blasted it away. She ate that debate for dinner and tore the heck out of it.

I sill wanna know what Biden said to her afterward that took her smile off of her face.

johnnyU on October 3, 2008 at 4:50 PM

Ifills bias was strong.

She abruptly cut off Sarah 13:30 in “Now let’s move on here”. Boy was Biden smiling as Ifill slapped down Palin. You need to see it. The bias was in the looks and timing here. Now Sarah had had only 45 seconds here. And Biden was given up to 120 seconds in responses but never once cut off, except to help him out and let him continue.

Later on Ifill could see Biden was messing up on Clean Coal again and getting really hurt by Drill baby Drill. Even though Ifill had just given Biden 100 seconds she cut Palin off at 70 Seconds asking about Carbon Offsets. Biden was answering and Ifill must have thought Biden was still hurt so she helpfully said “You mean clean Coal” and let Biden continue. Some may say she cut him off but she let him continue and helped him thus the difference.

Steveangell on October 3, 2008 at 4:59 PM

I actually missed a lot of the debate live, I caught it in reruns. However, my seventeen year old daughter sent me a text about 20 minutes into the debate indignant that the moderator was so biased and asked, “How can they get away with that?”

Now, she has been sick for weeks with recurring bouts of tonscilitis and strep throat and had had an outpatient procedure on her throat the day before. I tell you this because she has been out of it for a couple of days because of taking Loritab, so she hasn’t been aware of much and we haven’t talked about the upcoming debate. I didn’t even know she was aware of it much less watching.

I think that the bias was subtle in that the questions were designed to give Sen. Biden a forum in which he was comfortable. Gov. Palin did well and smacked both of them down.

Jvette on October 3, 2008 at 5:13 PM

My 13-yr old son, who had never heard of Gwen Ifill, told me that he felt the moderator seemed to favor Biden. His impression was that Gwen gave clearer and easier questions to Joe but made them harder or more confusing when addressing Sarah.

After the debate I showed his some of the controversy over Ifill’s book. He shook his head and said, “I knew something was wrong.”

Ace ODale on October 3, 2008 at 5:37 PM

The whisper in the ear at the end was everything you need to know about professionalism and bias. Ms “I love Obama” knows exactly what is at stake—millions. If he gets elected she makes millions, if he doesn’t her book is on the remainder stack within a month.

But here’s my real questions. Who writes and composes the questions? Where are the questions kept in their final form? Did she compose the questions? If so, with so much at stake how do we know for certain that the questions were not forwarded to Mr. Biden?

Has this issue been addressed previously?

patrick neid on October 3, 2008 at 6:47 PM

There were times when I thought Biden knew the question before she finished asking it, and his answers seemed totally prepared.
Nah, Gwen wouldn’t have leaked them to him or Barry’s campaign, WOULD SHE? Could she have mistakenly e-mailed them to Michelle O.? Nah.

Brat on October 3, 2008 at 1:36 PM

As I sat watching it with my wife I said..”it seems al least in the first 3 questions where Biden was addressed first…he answered so quickly (like without thinking) and so succinctly, that it seemed that way to me also…Imena the guy didn’t hesitate a millisecond…everyone go and watch it again on youtube and let us knwow what you think.

RedLizard64 on October 3, 2008 at 8:11 PM

The selection of the topics from the Democrat talking points is flagrant bias: the same kind of bias that makes the MSM print media so worthless!! They routinely bury Republican topics on the back pages with misleading headlines. Gwen did the same thing in a different medium.

Gwen Ifill should have resigned from this assignment if she had any integrity at all. Obviously, she doesn’t!!

landlines on October 3, 2008 at 8:35 PM

I thought that she did a good job… barely noticed her which is a credit to her. I wish more moderators were as good as her. I can’t think of any of her recent broadcasting as being biased. I think the issue of her being biased and suggesting she should recuse herself is just tactical smoke.

lexhamfox on October 3, 2008 at 9:21 PM

Umm, yeah, the only biased part of the debate was the questions.

How could that matter?

(shakes head)

Merovign on October 4, 2008 at 12:35 AM

Where the media is concerned, we will always have an uphill climb and complaining does no good. Overcome it and we can savor the victory that much more knowing the deck was stacked against us.

RobCon on October 4, 2008 at 12:04 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.