The media: whose side are they on, anyway?

Theoretically, journalists present objective accounts of campaign events, but over this prolonged contest for the Democratic nomination, charges of media bias have abounded. A steady stream of debates, gaffes, and other campaign events has presented ample fodder for soul-searching among members of the news media; that is, a lot of campaign coverage has been about campaign coverage.

A recent Politico article argues that the news media is "Obama's secret weapon." As others have already noted on our blog, ABC was widely panned for its handling of last week's debate. This article suggests that Stephanopolous and Gibson's questioning of Obama, although harsh, was not out of line. The article goes on to claim that the ensuing outcry over the moderators' tough approach actually indicates a broader media bias in his favor.

The notion of Obama as a media darling is not a new one; it's what led to SNL's oft-cited debate parody which fueled Clinton's complaints that the media favors Obama consistently. Media swooning was at its peak when Obama was an underdog, and it could partly be explained as a desire for a compelling storyline. Since Obama became a frontrunner, negative press surely has swelled--but has it been nearly as bad as the ugly stories Clinton dealt with during her long reign as frontrunner? This is the central question the article seeks to answer.

The Politico writers suggest that Obama was treated no worse during last week's debate than Clinton was treated in previous debates; why didn't journalists and political observers rush to her defense then? During the debate, Obama responded to the piercing questions by deriding the kind of campaign coverage that centers too much on gaffes and fluff at the expense of substance. This arguments fits into Obama's broad theme of a "new kind of politics," and for this reason, I think his criticisms of the media resonate much more strongly than his opponent's. Clinton was dismissed as "whiny" when she pointed to media favoritism; Obama is praised as courageous when he points to media shortsightedness.

With a likely matchup between Obama and McCain--both candidates having strong relationships with the media--it will be interesting to watch how coverage unfolds.

A Tale of Two Hillary Clintons in Two Days

Trying to track Hillary Clinton's current campaign strategy over the past week has been a bit of a challenge, given the range of tactics she used between the debate in Texas Thursday night and the press conference she gave Saturday morning in Cincinnati, Ohio.

In terms of how she performed at the debate, she was, for the most part, considered civil and well-prepared. She listed parts of her impressive career accomplishments and compared them to Barack's relatively light resume. And although she did try to continue the narrative of plagiarism that her campaign had been playing up against Obama during the previous week, this attack fell flat with the audience and showed how careful she was going to have to be if she wanted to balance the positive with occasional attempts to go negative. You could tell she viewed this debate, overall, as a chance to defy expectations of her coming in with mud-slinging desperation and instead take the high road and show her superiority over Obama on the issues themselves. During a brief moment in which she went on the attack, however, she allowed herself to appear nitpicky and eager to land a blow on Obama, as the issue of whether or not he had plagiarized parts of his speeches was beginning to seem old and insignificant by this point. For the most part, however, her debate performance was well coordinated, comforting, and full of substance. The moment that capped it all off was, of course, the answer Senator Clinton gave to the question of what she would consider the moment that had tested her the most. After alluding to her husband's affair, she wrapped up by stating that "no matter what happens in this contest, I am honored to be here with Barack Obama." The moment, which felt electric and genuine to many, showed how compassionate Hillary could be once again. It also showed how such a high-road strategy might pay off for her.

The downside to her closing comments? Many viewers and pundits considered her gracious words of friendship and hope for the country to be a sign that she was realizing that the end of her campaign was near and that she would step aside soon. This "valedictorian" claim was repeated quite often in the post-debate analysis, as she seemed to be publicly acknowledging the state of her own campaign and the need to unite behind Barack once she had left the race. In addition, bloggers even managed to find comments John Edwards had made that echoed, or "plagiarized," many of her sentiments from, what her campaign would refer to as, "the moment."

If this was meant to be another New Hampshire-style emotional moment that made Hillary seem real and vulnerable to voters, her strong words against Senator Obama the day after were designed to do just the opposite. It seems that her campaign realized the need to stop all of the talk about her dropping out and go on the offensive with harsh attacks. She did so in response to fliers the Obama campaign had been producing that called into question her record and positions on health care and trade agreements. Hillary's campaign had previously spoken out against such claims and tactics, but Hillary took this as an opportunity to blast Senator Obama herself in public and create a media-friendly sound bite. Therefore, she exclaimed, "Shame on you, Barack Obama." This moment changed her image from friendly to furious in just over one day's time. It was interesting to watch both tactics being used, and even more interesting to note that her positive, hopeful message had resonated more with voters and seemed to benefit her image more. Maybe she had finally picked something up from her Democratic rival, at least for the moment.

Clinton closes the Texas debate

I am sure we will discuss this tomorrow, but I wanted to make sure everyone had seen the very end of the Democratic debate in Texas. Senator Clinton made a powerful argument about her experiences and offered an interesting perspective on the campaign.

Fox News Debate Fallout

Perhaps the most important development from Senator Clinton's recent call for a weekly string of debates (see below also) is her willingness to participate in a debate sponsored by Fox News. Last year, there was a mass exodus from a planned debate co-sponsored by Fox News and the Congressional Black Caucus. This raised many hairs, as many saw Fox News as the last place to be debating about issues relevant to the African-American Community, and the three major democratic candidates dropped out of the debate. 

Now, Clinton has decided to embrace Fox and call on Obama to join her in a debate on the network. Although Clinton's stated reason for not attending the first Fox debate was conformity with the DNC-sponsored debate schedule (which the Fox debate was not part of), she avoided any backlash by refusing to take part in the event. While adding a series of debates to the already long list may be a reasonable request, Fox News is no place for Democrats to debate.

Time for a break!

The last week before Super Tuesday will have been marked by a seeming break in the campaign. Indeed, based on the outcomes of the first primaries and caucuses, Giuliani and Edwards’ withdrawals appeared to be a non event, Senator John McCain victory in Florida alike. Yet, two other events should have held people’s attention. The first one was President George W. Bush’s last State of the Union, and the second one was the CNN Democratic debate in Hollywood. To be perfectly honest, both events were disappointing.
Although people did not expect something new from the Democratic debate, the latter broke its promises. As usual, the topics tackled by Senators Clinton and Obama were the same; the American economy, the healthcare system and the war in Iraq. As for the arguments developed on each topic, both candidates contented themselves with developing the same answers since the beginning of their presidential bid; Barack Obama emphasized his opposition to the War in Iraq, while Hillary Clinton emphasized her female and maternal concern for children healthcare. At the end, observers tried to determine who won the debate. However, to win the debate seemed to be far from being candidates’ main purpose. A couple of days before Super Tuesday only, Democratic candidate frontrunners’ aim were to handle their own lead and not to make any mistake. That is probably what happened, as the comments the day after the debate were surprisingly nearly nonexistent.
As for Bush’s last State of the Union is concerned, nothing really exciting. White House officials promised viewers a speech that would look forward and not back, but rather than talking about the economy issue, the US president preferred to concentrate most of his speech on the War in Iraq. During a period of the campaign marked by endorsements, I looked for that of George W. Bush or at least a sign that could tell people president Bush’s preference for a candidate. Except maybe the similarity between President Bush and Senator McCain’s outlooks on the Iraq War issue, it is impossible to answer the question which is whether or not Bush is going to endorse officially a candidate. The week was as calm as Super Tuesday may be decisive.

GOP Debate Open Thread

How will McCain's recent surge of momentum play out in the debate tonight? Will the other candidates collectively go after him? Use this thread to add your comments and reactions. More as the debate progresses.