Amid Criticism, Jim Lehrer Explains Role of Debate Moderator

-
-
- letsliveinpeace
- added this
Even before Wednesday night’s debate ended, Twitter was ablaze with criticism of Lehrer for losing control of it and not being sharp in his questions. The candidates frequently bulled past Lehrer’s efforts to hold them to time limits.
Lehrer, in a statement issued Thursday night, said he thought the debate format accomplished its purpose of promoting direct exchanges between Obama, a Democrat, and Romney, a Republican, on substantive issues.
“Part of my moderator mission was to stay out of the way of the flow and I had no problems with doing so,” he said. “My only real personal frustration was discovering that 90 minutes was not enough time in that more open format to cover every issue that deserved attention.”
Moderators have to walk a fine line between being criticized for not doing enough or doing too much by forcefully interrupting candidates and being showy in their questions, said Frank Sesno, a former CNN Washington bureau chief and professor at George Washington University.
Moderators are selected by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which has sponsored the forums since 1988. Candy Crowley, of CNN, and Bob Schieffer, of CBS News, will moderate the next two Obama-Romney debates, with Martha Raddatz, of ABC News, handling the vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan.
Lehrer had moderated 11 presidential debates before Wednesday. But Lehrer, 78, has been semi-retired and off TV since last winter. He came back to a hyper-partisan environment with millions of TV critics sitting with laptops in their living rooms, eager to let their opinions be known.
There was a political dimension Thursday to critics of Lehrer’s critics. Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren wrote on her blog that Lehrer was being attacked because Democrats “expected the moderator to run interference for their candidate and the moderator didn’t bail out their bored, fumbling and unprepared candidate.”
“Instead,” she said, “moderator Jim Lehrer did the unthinkable — he let the candidates debate.”
Former PBS anchor Jim Lehrer says a debate moderator should be like a baseball umpire — get out of
-
- groups:
- Community
-
-
letsliveinpeace
-
Just because Willard rehearsed his lies for the debate, he thinks he can win. Unbelievable… and they really believe it!!!
- 7 months ago
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
hombre76
-
Current TV should host a Presidential debate and invite the third party candidates as well as the republican and Democratic candidates or just the third party is the others two wont come so that the is at least some venue for the American public to hear from all the options.
- 7 months ago
-
hombre76
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
hombre76:
Like who? Jill Stein?
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]
-
-
hombre76
-
Mishima:
For one.
- 7 months ago
-
hombre76
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
hombre76:
Why not a write-in for Van Jones?
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]
-
-
nanac
-
Thanks for posting!
- 7 months ago
-
nanac
-
-
nanac
-
I hope that this was Jim Lehrer's last debate. If the role of a debate Moderator is similar to a baseball umpire, then he failed badly.
Just like in baseball, debates has rules that should be followed, especially when one of the debaters is crazy, like in Mitt Romney's case. His disregard for the moderator/president/rules/truth/American people, ruined the debate, and threw President Obama off balanced.
Jim Lehrer is just trying to defend his reputation after turning the debate over to Mitt Romney. - 7 months ago
-
nanac
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
nanac:
I suppose questions about condoms, like Communist News Network's (CNN's) Anderson Cooper spent 15 minutes on, would be preferrable, right?
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]
-
-
hombre76
-
Mishima:
Communist News network ... HA that's rich. If CNN were anymore right they would give Fox a run for the title of most conservative duesh baggery. You really just sit the fuck around thinking up this crap don't you?
- 7 months ago
-
hombre76
-
-
Culdee
-
Oh c'mon people. That was a VERY moderated debate. Any more "moderation" would have amounted to nothing more than the candidates only having time to recite their talking points, which we've already heard thousands of times already!
Jim Lehrer allowed *real* debate to take place, and I found it very insightful as to which candidate knows their stuff better. When the candidates are allowed to "duke it out", it allows them to get to the "meat" of the topic. As a voter, I want to hear these things...we all should. I can't for the life of me figure out why people would want a moderator to cut all that out.
Cheers to Jim Lehrer...well done! :)
- 7 months ago
-
Culdee
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
Culdee:
I agree. Leher was really neutral, in my opinion. He asked good questions and said little.
I remember how absurd it got with these moderators in the Republican debates. Anderson Cooper kept pressing Santorum on the "sex stuff," focusing on something in particular, over and over and over.
Finally, he turned to Romney. Romney's comment was perfect and it embarrassed Cooper. (Paraphrasing): "Well, now that you have spent 15 minutes of the viewers' time talking about CONDOMS, let's get on to some important issues."
If left to the Liberal media, that is how they would run it. Leher asked good questions. My favorite was about the role of government. Obama really seemed rattled on that one. And Romney looked eager, almost like he was saying, "Perfect! Thank you, Jim, for asking that one!"
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]
-
-
COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
-
What we expected was the enforcement of time equity and subject matter, instead of letting one steal the other's time (without fisticuffs intervening) and holding debaters accountable to the questions posed to them, instead of letting them switch the subject and skirt the question. It really was less of a debate than a lopsided rant.
- 7 months ago
-
COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
-
-
COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
-
America thinks differently Jim... America doesn't see a moderated debate and a mud wrestling "free for all" as equivalent.
- 7 months ago
-
COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
-
-
chew_chew
-
There is an upside to the absence of a moderator. Mr Mittens hung so many of his dirty laundry lies out on the public close line. Now, millions of Americans have seen his lies for themselves. Mr Lehrer offered each candidate enough line to hang themselves, and Mr Mittens took him up on that.
The debate that Mr Mittens "won" is fast turning into his Waterloo.
- 7 months ago
-
chew_chew
-
-
MSII
-
chew_chew:
Unfortunately his "base" doesn't care about the lies, they just "believe".
- 7 months ago
-
MSII
-
-
HarukoHaruhara
-
I hope someone doesn't mind me stealing this!
http://jackholesrealm.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/background-o-copy1.jpg?w=960&a...
- 7 months ago
-
HarukoHaruhara
-
-
letsliveinpeace
-

-
What does the Matador do to the Bull at the END?????!!!!
- 7 months ago
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
http://current.com/community/93921299_the-last-word-rewriting-the-debate-nobody-...
The Last Word Rewriting the Debate Nobody-Won - 7 months ago
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
letsliveinpeace:
Romney won, hands down. Easy.
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]
-
-
hombre76
-
Mishima:
complete horse pucky.
- 7 months ago
-
hombre76
-
-
letsliveinpeace
-
He is in full agreement with Lawrence O'Donnell. A moderator that tries to be a part of the debate will only distort what a debate is all about. 99.99% of the conversation should be between the candidates only. This makes sense to me.
- 7 months ago
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
letsliveinpeace
-
Amid Criticism, Jim Lehrer Explains Role of Debate Moderator
http://current.com/community/93919943_romney-obama-tell-jim-lehrer-shut-the-f-up... - 7 months ago
-
letsliveinpeace
-
-
Mishima [removed]
-
letsliveinpeace:
It is amazing how the Left is contriving so many reasons to explain Obummer's poor performance. From the incompetent moderator to altitude to....racism! No kidding. One MSNBC commentator blamed it on racism.
- 7 months ago
-
Mishima [removed]