Gwen Ifill’s employers at PBS: “[N]ot sure what the big deal is;” clueless McCain agrees
Responding to questions about PBS anchor/VP debate moderator/”Age of Obama”-proclaiming author Gwen Ifill’s conflicts of interest, a PBS spokeswoman huffed: “The book has been a known factor for months, so I’m not sure what the big deal is.”
It wasn’t a “known factor” to the McCain campaign. And it’s highly doubtful the American public would have been fully informed about Ifill’s Inauguration Day-timed Obama book before Thursday by PBS or Ifill or the Presidential Debate Commission.
John McCain told Fox News that’s he confident the “well-respected” Ifill will be fair. But at the heart of the controversy is an issue McCain is supposed to care deeply about: Transparency.
Perhaps he and PBS flacks should review their government-funded network’s own editorial standards before pooh-poohing fundamental questions about Ifill’s damaged credibility:
C. Objectivity
Along with fairness and accuracy, objectivity is the third basic standard to which journalists are held. While PBS holds all news and informational content to standards of objectivity, PBS recognizes that other types of content may not have the objective presentation of facts as their goal.Objectivity, however, encompasses more than news and information presented in a neutral way. It also refers to the process by which a work was produced, including work that involves analysis or, as a result of reporting, arrives at conclusions. To begin with, journalists must enter into any inquiry with an open mind, not with the intent to present a predetermined point of view. Beyond that, for a work to be considered objective, it should reach a certain level of transparency. In a broad sense, this spirit of transparency means the audience should be able to understand the basics of how the producers put the material together. For example, the audience generally should be able to know not only who the sources of information are, but also why they were chosen and what their potential biases might be. As another example, if producers face particularly difficult editorial decisions that they know will be controversial, they should consider explaining why choices were made so the public can understand. Producers should similarly consider explaining to the audience why certain questions could not be answered, including why, if confidential sources are relied on, the producers agreed to allow the source to remain anonymous. And the spirit of transparency suggests that if the producers have arrived at certain conclusions or a point of view, the audience should be able to see the evidence so it can understand how that point of view was arrived at. One aspiration implicit in the idea of transparency is that an audience might appreciate and learn from content with which it also might disagree.
Opinion and commentary are different from news and analysis. When a program, segment, or other content is devoted to opinion or commentary, the principle of transparency requires that it be clearly labeled as such. Any content segment that presents only like-minded views without offering contrasting viewpoints should be considered opinion and should identify who is responsible for the views being presented.
No content distributed by PBS should permit conscious manipulation of selected facts in order to propagandize.
Ifill’s failure to acknowledge her book and the legitimate ethical questions it raises on Thursday night would be a dereliction of duty.
Period.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Surprise! Another unbiased journalist in the tank for Obama « The Right Daily
- Gwen Ifill, Author of Obama Book to Moderate VP Debate « Sooshi Soo
- Watch out - VP Debate Moderator Has a Clear Bias | Pirates! Man Your Women!
- Random Thoughts on the Veep Debate
- Gwen Ifill For “The One” | BigMouthFrog
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: I’m sure Ifill will do a professional job, says McCain
- Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » Ifill-Gate: Much Ado About Nothing
- Donklephant » Blog Archive » Ifill-Gate: Much Ado About Nothing
- Michelle Malkin » A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama; Update: McCain campaign didn’t know about book; PBS and McCain shrug
- The Moderator For Thursdays Debate Has A Book Coming Out About Barack Obama..But I am Sure She Will Be Fair..Right? | Right Voices
- Lowering Expectations? | Politics and Hypocrisy
- Conflict of Interest: Gwen Ifill’s Financial Stake « Pocket Change - Now Lint Free!
- Soccer Dad
- TONIGHTS VP DEBATE MODERATOR IS A FLAMING OBAMA SUPPORTER AND RACIST « The Florida Patriot
- Shopfloor » Blog Archive » Tort Reform Thursday: Topics for Tonight’s Veep Debate
- Blatant Anti-Palin Bias in the Liberal Media: A Collection (85 Cases) « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Michelle Malkin » SARAH ROCKS!
- SARAH ROCKS! « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- What if Palin Wins? | curtis schweitzer (dot) net
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Media Bias, Sarah Palin
Ed Driscoll
» The University Archipelago
Ed Driscoll
» First We Take Chicago, Then We Take BerlinNewsBusters.org
» Matthews on Ft. Hood Suspect Warning Signal: 'That's Not a Crime to Call al Qaeda, Is It?'Pundit & Pundette
» Westboro haters have enough to go around for everyoneTigerHawk
» Abortion and health care "reform"Weekly Standard
» The Federal Bureau of Non-Investigationprotein wisdom
» The One note song [Darleen Click]Pundit & Pundette
» Guess what? Hasan frequented strip club
And, No. 88, trust me … journalists like Ifill don’t know how to “tread carefully” as normal persons would define it. Charlie Gibson thought he was treading carefully as he peered down his nose at Palin. So did Dan Rather during Kinko-gate. Remember, Rather — a foaming-at-the-mouth Bush hater — once defined himself as “middle of the road” politically. He meant it.
Believe me. They’re so off-the-rails they don’t know they’re biased. It’s an alternate universe.
Brokaw also asked someone (Rudy?) the other day if they disagreed with all the scientists and algore about ‘global warming’…there ya go. Brokaw thinks algore is a scientist.
Brokaw is a broken pitchfork: a useless tool.
I saw a news broadcast last night, and they were in small town USA and asked the old white folks at the diner who they were going to vote for, and over half of the overall clad old men raised their hands for Obama…
We are screwed….
Yup, 13-28, Ifill should note her bias upfront.
Though I don’t know if McCain is allowing Sarah to take on anything. McCain was unfocused during his first debate, Obama seemed more sharp even though he was just mindlessly regurgitating talking points. He interrupted McCain’s responses, but McCain failed to give it back at him in kind.
I’m not a big McCain booster, but I’d dearly love to see Obama get smacked down good bigtime in November. Unfortunately, I don’t see McCain’s “go along to get along” attitude as very encouraging to that end.
McCain was going great guns and doing very well taking on Obama’s celebrity and the media’s Ifill-ish obsession with it. Then he stopped and his campaign has been lackluster, at best, since then.
If McCain wasn’t so interested in playing Mr. Nice Guy his campaign should demand the uber-Obamite Ifill be replaced, perhaps Jim Lehrer who’s reasonably even-handed could step in.
I sense the Maverick is frustrated. He has been up against the (MSM) fix for months now and it’s wearing him down.
He probably realizes no matter who moderates the debate tomorrow that Sarah’s words will be parsed, twisted and exaggerated while any gaffe by Biden will be overlooked.
This is a sad era for my Country. It’s upside down.
A war hero, a man with integrity vs. an unknown with dubious community ties.
Should be no contest.
Finally, who are theses dopes behind Obama at these rallys?
Middle aged women by the hundreds fawning over The One as though he really is.
I don’t get it.
Didn’t Brokaw also drop the “Jesus was a Community Organizer” line on Rudy? That’s good journalism.
Pete Rose was banned from induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame because he had A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME of the games he was managing.
This isn’t just about bias; it’s about FINANCIAL VESTED INTEREST.
Pete ….meet Gwen.
Biden could scream GET THE SQUIRRELS OFF ME!!
and the press would just say ‘thats just old joe’
We’re done.
not to worry people. the october surprise will be war with iran/pakistan instigated by israel, but fought by the one and only army on earth. oh yeah, i forgot syria, lebanon, egypt, saudi arabia, somalia, yemen, and all of the alphabet-stans. strap em on boys, here it comes.
As well as a likely violation of Federal Law re: the (supposed) non-political nature of PBS, Fred:
47 USC § 396 (f)(3)
(f) Nonprofit and nonpolitical nature of Corporation
(3) The Corporation may not contribute to or otherwise support any political party or candidate for elective public office.
We’re done. McCain doesn’t see a problem. He must have done gone round the bend as it were. All hail Dear Leader.
I totally give up. I can’t take it any longer.
I must say that I am quite disappointed in those of you who think that McCain shouldn’t complain because the media will get on him. It is time to get out from under that rock you have been living under these last 30 years or so….the media will cry foul REGARDLESS of whether McCain says anything now or after Palin gets torn to pieces by this conflict of interest “journalist”. IT DOESN’T MATTER TO THE MEDIA! If any of you even think that McCain’s complaints will be heard AFTER the debate, which they won’t for the most part, again, it doesn’t matter! The media will have already done the damage and the contents of the debate, NOT the bias, will be front page. McCain and everyone around him should be throwing a fit right now. If they scream loud enough, the media will have to respond at least a little bit even handedly to come across almost fair in the eyes of the public. The masses aren’t the dumb sheep that the Dems/Media take them for. This must be addressed in the loudest possible way, period. He really should demand that if she stays on as moderator, then Rush moderates the next McCain/Obama debate.
If he continues this obvious pander to the media, whether it is pandering or just plain gross stupidity, the media will be empowered and continue to just run right over him and his campaign. Who is electing our leaders anyway…We, the people, or the Far Left Media?
My Aunt Dorothy (yes, from Kansas) once said that her mom & dad (my grandparents) told her to always vote Democrat because Roosevelt saved them from the Depression. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Aunt Dorothy’s out there that will blindly pull the lever for the Dems for the same reason. Nevermind that Roosevelt was not the saint the Left would like for us to believe, and that the Democrat party of today is nothing like the Democrat party of 60+ years ago. She doesn’t want to hear any debate about it. Grandma and Grandpa said vote Dem, so that’s that.
McCain is clueless and with every stupid move he makes me think of Boosh!
FireBlogger said:
I agree, and sense he might be giving up. I hope he won’t. “Country First” is the right mantra he needs to keep repeating. The country needs his help! … I wonder if the Clintons will come to the rescue with some kind of last minute dirt on Obama leaked, of course, through some conservative news source … we all know they don’t want him to be president (and they’re really good at that kind of thing)!
Who is electing our leaders anyway…We, the people, or the Far Left Media?
…………………………………………………..
Was that a rhetorical question?
Have some issues with “that people”, Cheapo? If so, you’re in the wrong place.
Warning: Conspiracy theory
I think Palin is becoming the “fall-guy” of McCains campaign.
The GOP was probably blindsided by the fact that the Conservatives ended up LIKING her rather than completely rejecting her. The most likely scenario was that everyone would hate her and then they could blame everything on her.
Maybe she made too many waves by going against the established Republicans in Alaska and now they are setting her up for a complete fall from grace.
A) The GOP was guaranteed to lose this election anyway so why fight it, B) take care of Palin being a ‘thorn in their side’ in the future and C) then build on a platform for a 2012 comeback.
You know what? If the Soviets can attack Georgia and nobody has a problem with it, then Israel should go right on ahead and bomb Iran.
What incentive does Israel have to practice restraint, if they can see that the American Media is successfully allowed to fix an election, with a new President who doesn’t support them ????
They might as well just go start bombing away. Besides, it helps McCain !
Exactly! I am expecting my ballot to look like this:
PRESIDENT
O John McCain (Republican)
O Barack Obama & The MSM (Democrat)
O Bob Barr (Libertarian)
…and if I can drift off thread… I see China is planning a moon landing soon. The USA should get a military presence up there soon and lay claim to that spheroid.
LOL, what is going to happen if the Chinese land on the moon and cant find our cr@p laying around up there, because they cant find it?
Or….. what is going to happen if the Chinese land on the moon, REMOVE all of our cr@p and then claim to eveyone that we were NEVER there?
Our credibility would be shot either way
EXCELLENT!!! Now who can we get to go after them?
I hope they’ll give proper credit with a plaque: “Special Thanks to William Blythe Clinton – whose help was instrumental in this effort!”
Let’s use this moment as an inspiration, a jumping off point… for a free market press.
Let us now work to set PBS/NPR adrift.
:0)
Gwen’s next book can be titled ‘How I Brought Down Public Broadcasting.’
Their argument will be that individual contributors are entitled to their own opinions and does not reflect the position of the ‘Corporation’. Plausible deniability.
Now if you can find something where she says something along the lines of, “I represent PBS’s executive position”
[playing along with the conspiracy...]
D) And are suddenly blindsided in 2012 when conservatives break off and form a 3rd Conservative party with Palin at the head of the ticket… winning the Whitehouse, effecting real reform, balancing the budget, eliminating all earmarks, downsizing Federal Government, building the fence and flips Iran the bird! LIFE IS GOOD!
(hey… that was fun!)
But are they willing to put their money where their gaping pie-holes are? Substitute Bill O’Reilly as moderator- he has less of a bias to either one.
Very well could be the case, do any real conservatives trust the GOP any longer. Palin, Jindal, West and the young man Utah(don’t remember his name) amongst others could be the future, but where do they go…to the incompetent, corrupt, sold out GOP? That is the really sad scary part in this whole debacle, where do we as conservatives united and become a force?
I hate to say this, but because Ifill is black herself, and everyone knows about 98% of blacks are voting for Obama, won’t it at least be obvious if she isn’t fair to Gov Palin that that is the reason why?
I’m not going to judge someone on the color of their skin.
I suspect any number of Fedreral agencies, dominigan, starting with the FCC. I’m not sure who could file the report/complaint and, if someone did, if anything would come of it anyway. The Feds are still trying to figure out the Palin email break-in, I imagine they’ll have a report on that sometime in, ahh say, the Spring of 2014.
But, helllyeah, an activist conservative group like Judicial Watch might get somewhere with this fast if it acted mucho pronto. If nothing else, force PBS to dump Ifill from the debate.
Indeed, Tyr – while she does seem to have a strong interest with race, e.g. her Obama book, it is the color of Ifill’s politics that “colors” any political topic she touches.
If she had an ethical bone in her body, she would’ve removed herself. But, apparently, being another tool of the Obama campaign, she refused to doso.
Gwen Ifill is not my first pick but then in today’s world this obvious conflict of interest is routine for our MSM. God Bless America and my prayers the last week has been for our good Lord to gift Sarah with the wit, charm,and the elequence of Williams Jennings Bryan so that at least she can come in a close second to Joe Biden, who could only garner less than 1% of the vote but now is a great choice and of great intelligence, charm, experience and of course has been wrong on about every foreign policy issue in this decade.
Just to be fair, but wouldn’t it be in Ifill’s best interest to actually be fair? If she shows any detectable bias against Palin, I’m sure that would cause backlash similar to the Gibson interview. In turn, that would hurt the Obama campaign.
On the other hand, the only shot the Democrats have to discredit Palin further is for Ifill to be fair AND Palin not perform that well against Biden.
PBS stands for PRO-BAMA-STATION.
The “O”, in OBAMA, has been left out because we just shake our heads and say O GOD (as we can’t believe that PBS continues to get millions of dollars and say – with a straight face – that “what is the big deal”.).
Nuff said. Nostradamuslives by Jeff Schrembs
This whole thing just makes me sick!
Wrinkly Old White Dude wants to lose. He likes the Democrats too much to really take them on. He only knows how to do that with conservatives.
That would never happen. We all know Dems and their supporters never remove themselves from any position of power (perceived or real).
On another note, today, I’ve been thinking about all of this depressing stuff going on. I’ve decided I’m going to get angry and stay angry with them. They want us to feel defeated and I’m not going to oblige them. I might not be able to change the circumstances, but I will not give them the power to make me feel powerless any longer.
PBS/NPR have long ago abandoned any claim to objectivity in dealing with political issues. For that reason alone, I stopped contributing to keep the PC machinery alive and intact. It’s a shame in many ways, they used to be quite good… not any more.
Of course, many others like me have spoken through our withholding of funds – but is PBS/NPR listening? I suspect not. All I see are more frequent fund-raisers, greater cozying up to corporate donors, etc.
C’mon Gwen, ‘do the right thing’ – step aside.
Does PBS stand for “Pimping Barack Shamelessly?”
Shouldn’t we call it what it is?