Moderator Bias

Ifill is far from being stupid.

After the truth about her bias came out, she had to play it straight or her reputation as a "journalist", such as it is, would have suffered immensely.

The truth forced her to be even handed, and that's all most of us wanted.

 

The title of the book was public knowledge as early as July 23 in the Washington Times. The moderators were chosen on Aug 5.

 

Yep, you're right on. She knew we would all be watching for any hint of bias. I love it when a plan works!!!

 

I could be wrong Revmitchell, but in listening to the video, it seems like the focus of the book is black achievements today in politics. Obama appears to be only one of four examples. Of course I haven't read the book, but I think Obama is not the central point of her writings.

Also, I think Ms. Ifill did a good job.

 

I would point out that the McCain camp knew Mrs Ifill was the moderator and that she had written this book, yet they did not object to her being the moderator, but you would probably demand proof and I don't feel like wasting my time trying to please you.

 

Wow! I can't believe I find myself agreeing with the quickest deleter (if that's a word) on the BB. Regardless of the reason, Ms. Ifill did a fine job.

BTW, I think Sarah Palin did better than I expected. There was some things I believe she could have done better, but that applies to Joe Biden as well.

 

Looks like your unsupported accusation is being rejected.

 

Rev. didn't do his homework. The book is not on the market yet. The chapter on Obama has not been written yet. The title of the book is: The Breakthrough: Politics in the Age of Obama.

Here is an editorial review of the book from Amazon.com

I have seen Ifill interview many people over the years on The New Hour. She has always been very professional and very fair handed. Last night she stayed true to form, professional and fair. The conservatives, I believe, spread the rumor about the book and Ifill ... which was a very misleading rumor ... so if Palin fell on her face they could blame Ifill. It is a common political tactic.

 

How is it showing bias. The book is about contemporary black politicians and Obama is, because he is running for president, the foremost current black politician.

Would you say an author was biased toward FDR if they wrote a book with the title, "The Political Climate in America in the Era of FDR?

Using your logic you would call Harrison Salisbury a Communist because he wrote a book entitled, "The New Emperors: China in the Era of Mao and Deng." It is a very good book, you should read it.

 

Why would I demand proof? I don't even care. I think Ifill is a typical leftleaning commentator on the news. But I think they can be even handed and fair (as I already said). You put way too much stock in this.

 

This is what you offered in the four days I was gone from the board....................

Keen insight?

You made an assertion in the initial post, and have yet to offer anything in the way of proof. As a matter of fact, the proof you have offered actually contradicts the very point you were making. In other words, the proof you offer shows that your assertion is completely wrong.

Let's try this again: go back and read the first post in this discussion that you provided. The language is strong, and you have made it clear you believe she had a bias. Yet I have asked you multiple times to provide any evidence that would show a bias. You have failed to do so. MOREOVER, the evidence you did provide contradicts your assertion. Despite this, you offer nothing but the cotumely directed at me that I have reproduced at the top.

Hmmm........

It certainly would help your argument if you could provide anything to support your oft-repeated assertion. Thus far you have failed....repeatedly.