In this story from the Daily Beast you can get an inside look at what Fox News was up to prior to the Republican debate.
HINT: They weren’t about asking substantive questions and allowing candidates to present opposing points of view, they were about stirring the pot. Of course the candidates took the bait. Hook, line and sinker.
It was part political spectacle, part American Idol, part YouTube extravaganza, a pure Roger Ailes production—and the latest sign that the Fox News chairman is quietly repositioning America’s dominant cable-news channel.
Hours before last week’s presidential debate in Orlando, Ailes’s anchors sat in a cavernous back room, hunched over laptops, and plotted how to trap the candidates. Chris Wallace said he would aim squarely at Rick Perry’s weakness: “How do you feel about being criticized by some of your rivals as being too soft on illegal immigration? Then I go to Rick Santorum: is Perry too soft?”
“That’s going to get some fireworks going,” said managing editor Bill Sammon, grinning.
I don’t really blame Fox News, because after all they are a business and want to produce the most entertaining program they can. The Republicans allowed this to happen the way it went down and I for one don’t think the way these debates have been structured is helping anyone but President Obama.
H/T Ace of Spades
I couldn’t agree more.
Its a dog and pony show…
A dog and pony show is entertaining.
HAH!
Actually I said this before but the way bachman and Santorum and ROmney have been behaving its more like GOP Jerry Springer show…
At what point does the Stupid Party leadership and its National Committecritters realize that it doesn’t need to work with the Dinosaur Media to put on one of these extravaganzas? Just how much does it cost to rent some studios and stream what goes on in them? Why cede control of your most important asset to people who don’t like you and to their bosses who only want to exploit you for their gain, not yours? Who want “entertainment” not information, and that to sell commercial interruptions and screen ticker place.
Better yet, why not come up with a format that doesn’t even pretend to be a debate? What might that be? I don’t know. I’m not in that biz. But there’ve gotta be better ways that these timewasters whose goal is to bring out the worst.
Encourage PJTV and a Tea Party group to run a debate? Damn, there I go giving myself a professional jealousy ulcer …
Well for whatever it’s worth, I don’t take seriously anything people on Fox say. Yes, they might lean a bit more centralist in their reporting, but they’re still the media.
This research was kind of interesting, however I wonder who gets to decide “right” and “wrong” in the research. I mean, Rush Limbaugh has an independent group that claims he’s right 99.6% of the time.
http://www.hamilton.edu/news/polls/pundit
This all seems vaguely familar……….. http://www.threedonia.com/archives/44073
Considering I wrote that post, which is about how the candidates lying about things is a window into who they really are, and this post is about Fox News setting up their debate to cause fricton I’d say it’s not the same. A variation of a theme maybe, but it’s not the same post in my opinion.
Cetainly not the same post. But many of the replies/comments apply equally. Too bad the canidates would not pool the money necessary to buy the airtime and set their own rules for their own debate.
Oh, and still can’t stop my Newt love. the same debate of which you blog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxQTp07KS_k and a previous debate : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzWNgMERoK4
He speaks directly to concerns, take another look at Newt.
Outlaw I fully agreed with you then and now.
I stopped watching FOX News over a year ago. Period.
Ain’t Red Eye, I ain’t watchin’.
Red Eye being the only exception.
Here’s what they should do: Depending on how many candidates there are, have a 20 minute q and a session with each candidate. No back biting, no silly back and forth bs….we’d actually learn something about the candidates..but that would be too easy..sigh..