Debate Polls: Journalism

An article by Megan Tady, a writer for Free Press, measures voter reactions to the quality of journalism present in the foreign policy debate last Friday. Speaking from the standpoint of a person who is damn sick of polling, I found this spin on the all-too-common "what do you think of Obama?" poll to be quite interesting.

The article is centered around RatetheDebates.org results, a website that allowed viewers/listeners of the debate to weigh in on what they thought of Lehrer's performance, his questions and after-debate media discussion. The article states that:

"Obama supporters in the panel tended to criticize the absence of questions on Africa (80% vs. 58% of McCain's) and China (74% vs.64%); and on the foreign policy issues of global warming (89% vs. 42%); human rights abuses (85% vs. 57%); AIDS and other diseases (86% vs. 55%); and globalized trade (76% vs. 56%)"

I couldn't agree more with this criticism of Lehrer's questioning. It again begs the question that we have been asking ourselves in class: if third party candidates were allowed to participate in debates, would these questions been asked?

The article also confirms some perceptions we have been discussing, including one held by conservatives of the "liberal media" and liberals of the "conservative media."

"McCain and Obama supporters alike tended to be more critical of the quality of election coverage by traditional broadcast news sources. Nearly 7 out of 10 McCain supporters (69%) rated election coverage by national network news as "poor" (versus 52% of Obama supporters). Nearly 7 out of 10 Obama supporters (68%) counted as "poor" local television news (versus 58% of McCain supporters). "

Though not excessively substantive, I found this article to be interesting for its insistance on good journalism, especially in the debates. This is an issue that needs to be addressed incessantly as the debate season has been opened. Here's to looking forward to the Palin-Biden debate this Thursday.