Jim Lehrer: Yes, I Didn't "Control" Two Grown Men Vying For the Presidency. So What?

The media is big on "control," isn't it? They always want one of their own subtly guiding things.

Jim Lehrer has a few words in response to those who thought he let President Obama and Mitt Romney ramble on and roll over him in Wednesday’s presidential debate:

“So what?”

...

Q: People could see that they talked over you and went past the time limits that you were trying to enforce. What was your reaction as that was happening?

A: It was frustrating as it began happening, when they didn’t answer the questions directly and they went over time. But I kept reminding myself: “Hey, wait a minute. Waaait a minute. This isn’t about rules. This is about the reality of the exchange of the two candidates.” So I just backed off. . . . I had no problem doing that. Yes, there were times when I pushed them, and sometimes they ran over and ignored me and all that sort of stuff. So what? I mean, it isn’t about my power, my control or whatever. It was about what the candidates were doing, what they were talking about and what impression they were leaving with the voters. That’s what this is about. It’s not about how I felt about things.

There were several minutes in the middle of the debate where I just backed off and they just talked. And I thought those were the magic moments.

We understand why the media insists it must have "a firmer hand on the till," as one critic insisted: Just as that metaphor suggests, they wish to guide the vessel safely to port.

I hate moderators and I love Jim Lehrer's version of it. Here's how the media cheats: There are some questions which Obama can't bring up, but would like asked of Mitt Romney. Culture war type questions -- they hurt liberals, too.

Obama can't bring up contraception as a question for Romney. Because doing so hurts Obama. A lot of swing-vote Catholics are not happy with his mandate.

But if a "neutral third party" badgers Romney about it, while not mentioning it to Obama... best of both worlds for the liberal cause: Romney gets hit with a swing issue that might lose him some voters, but Obama doesn't lose any of his voters over the same wedge issue.

And that's what they mean by control.

posted by Ace at 04:26 PM

| Access Comments