VP Debate Moderator Wrote Pro-Obama Book
The moderator of tonights VP debate is less than neutral. She has a financial stake in an Obama victory.
The moderator of tomorrow’s debate between the two candidates for vice president, Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, seems to be less than neutral. If Barack Obama wins the elections, a book of hers will be published on inauguration day called “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.”
In it, PBS’s Gwen Ifill argues that ‘the “black political structure” of the civil rights movement is giving way to men and women who have benefited from the struggles over racial equality.’
According to quite some people, Ifill already proved to be highly biased during this year’s campaign. Whenever she had to report about Sarah Palin for PBS she acted in a dismissive manner, sometimes even with a ‘look of disgust’ on her face.
PBS viewer Brian Meyers of Granby, Conn. said, for instance: “Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance.”
As Michelle Malkin pointed out in a post at her blog today,”[m]y dictionary defines ‘moderator’ as ‘the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.’ On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.”
“But there is nothing ‘moderate’ about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out,” Malkin wrote.
Karl at Patterico’s Pontifications explained that the problem with Iffil isn’t that she is biased. Rather, it is that she is breaking ethics all journalists are supposed to adhere to. ‘The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics provides that journos should “[a]void conflicts of interest, real or perceived.” The Radio-Television News Directors Association Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct states that “Professional electronic journalists should present the news with integrity and decency, avoiding real or perceived conflicts of interest.” PBS, which employs Ms. Ifill, has in place Editorial Standards and Policies listing “real or perceived conflicts of interest” as unprofessional conduct,’ he explained.
And so the American media continue to embarass themselves, and betray their profession. American journalists have, on a massive scale, broken with their own rules of professional behavior during this year’s campaign, and seem determined to carry on down the path of subjectivity. It will be interesting to see where, if anywhere, this will end. As long as it work, one suspects, the bias will continue.
Attacking the integrity of one of America’s most respected non-partisan journalists is a new low in the McCain campaign’s war against the press. I watch liberal commentators for entertainment, but I watch Washington Week for news, precisely because I know that I can count on Gwen Ifill to present all sides of a story in a completely unbiased manner. The claims against her are totally unfounded. Has everyone forgotten that she moderated the last vice-presidential debate, and there were no claims of a bias then?
You claim that her book is pro-Obama, despite the fact that it hasn’t been released yet. Did you get an advanced reader’s copy or something? You also say that if Obama wins, the book will be published on inauguration day. Really? So you think the outcome of the election will determine the release date? Are you getting your info from real sources, or from McCain?
Ifill has stated that she makes no judgement about whether Obama would be a good president. Her book is simply about the evolution of black politics in America up to the present. If a journalist is violating some ethics code by writing a history book, that code needs to be revised, because many well-respected journalists have done so.
Gwen Ifill’s professionalism is impeccable. If you want to see what bias in the media looks like, re-read your own column. It is clearly based on rumor, and lacks any journalistic integrity whatsoever.
Terry, from what I’ve read Gwen does actually like Obama great deal, and considers him the new leader of the African American community. See this article, written for "Essence" magazine. Hint: The title is "The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family". It does not become harsher. Now to be fair Essence is not a hard-hitting news outlet, but it is clear that Gwen likes the Obama family.
I personally believe that Gwen wouldn’t blow her considerable journalistic reputation to score a few points on a VP candidate, but I do see where conservatives might not be very trusting. Would you be, if the moderator had written a soaring article about McCain?
I’m the resident Obama fan on the site Terry, and Michael the resident Obama opposer. We each have our biases and we are hardly secretive about it, but personally, though I don’t see it as a panic-worthy situation, I do see why it concerns people.
Claudia, please tell me how "Portrait of an American Family" is in any way an endorsement of Obama. If Gwen had spent the afternoon with McCain, and simply described the scene of him hanging out with his family, would that be considered a pro-McCain piece? The article makes no comment on his worthiness for office. It’s a portrait of an afternoon. That’s all.
For your editor-in-chief to criticize someone’s journalistic integrity in a piece that presents hearsay as fact is quite laughable. It wouldn’t have taken him long to get the facts about the book, but he’s obviously not interested. As a result, he is misleading his readers.
If any of the sources he cited had seen Washington Week after the republican convention, they would know why Ifill looked so disgusted on the floor that night. Republican speakers had been railing against the press all night long. By the time Palin finished her speech, the crowd had turned against the reporters who were covering the convention - pointing at them, shouting at them, giving them dirty looks, and shaking their fists at them. Yeah, she was a little put out.
The McCain camp is not just waging a war against the "liberal press," or the "media elite." They are waging a war against all media that they do not control, and that should make everyone nervous - not just those of us who appreciate the facts.
LOL Please show some actual bias by Ifill over her long career at PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/gwen/
Lets compare her journalism with a Fred Barnes or Sean Hannity. Did anyone on the Right question Barnes ethics after Rebel in Chief, any interview or commentary isn’t biased in this case?
Quite apart from from the question of whether the book will be pro-Obama (and the description at Amazon strongly suggests it will be), the fact that it is due for release on Inaugural Day tells anyone that the marketing strategy for the book is intended to capitalize on an Obama victory. The book — pro or anti-Obama — stands to make more money if he wins. That is the financial conflict Ifill had when she took the job without disclosing said conflict. It’s why the Columbia Journalism Review, among others, reached the same conclusion regarding her conflict.