The NPR News Blog
 
 

ABC Shrugs Off Furor Over Debate Performance

In a surprise to no one, ABC News shrugged off the media attention it received over its handling of the debate between the two Democratic candidates on Wednesday night. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that "the morning after Wednesday night's presidential campaign debate in Philadelphia, the names on the nation's lips were . . . Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos."

"Gibson, the avuncular ABC news anchor, and Stephanopoulos, the network's mop-top political analyst, found themselves at the center of a cloudburst of criticism for their interrogation of Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton."

But ABC was unapologetic.

"The questions were tough and fair and appropriate and relevant," Stephanopoulos told the Associated Press. "We wanted to focus at first on the issues that were not focused on during the last debates."

The audience of 10.7 million was the largest for a presidential debate so far in this campaign, Jeffrey Schneider, senior vice president for ABC News noted. With an audience that big, "we're not surprised that there is a huge reaction," he said. "It's yet another indication of how passionately engaged the American people are with this race."

He said ABC did not regard the debate as a conflict of interest for Stephanopoulos, who had been a press aide to President Bill Clinton. "He's been here 11 1/2 years, far longer than the time he spent in the White House," Schneider said.

While most journalism experts felt that the conflict of interest question was not a concern, many felt it did take ABC too long to get to the important questions.

"I was disappointed with the first 40 minutes of it," said G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College. "They should have started asking questions pertaining to policy issues and leadership and not focused so much on personal questions. . . . There was nothing new."

 

Comments (Send a comment)

It is their prerogative to think they did a good job, just as it is mine (and many others, from what I surmise) to cease being a viewer of their programs. I don't watch Fox news for a reason, and I no longer watch ABC news going forward as a result of this debate. I wouldn't have minded the personal questions if they had simply been balanced, but the one sided nature is what I find unprofessional.

Sent by Jenn | 11:01 AM ET | 04-18-2008

Let's hope that those who live by the market die by the market. If ABC won't listen to the hue and cry about its irresponsible coverage and participation in the worst elements that are destroying hope for intelligent political discourse in this country, then it will fall by the wayside as people seek their news elsewhere. I, for one, think the DNC should not award any more debates to ABC. Let it join Fox in the ranks of "news" organizations that focus on the distractions instead of the real issues.

Sent by Sweetie | 11:02 AM ET | 04-18-2008

"While most journalism experts felt that the conflict of interest question was not a concern"

good to know that Fox News is watching the henhouse, so to say

i thought it was a teeveee show of enlightenment (fulfilling the obligation to public service for using a public resource, ie bandwidth) for the great masses and not for self-apointed "journalism experts". guess i was wrong.

as for the ABC crock "We wanted to focus at first on the issues that were not focused on" what planet have they been holiday-making on? the wright flap got over 3,000 unique major media mentions (i haven't run the bittergate numbers but they were surely over a 1000 by the time of the debate. ditto for tuzla twister.) they weren't performing the service of confronting candidates on inadequately covered "issues".

i say revoke ABC affiliate licenses. and henceforth let's have only adult organizations manage debates (npr, womens league of voters, common cause).

no more mickey giving us the mickey.

Sent by tim in exile | 11:16 AM ET | 04-18-2008

The questions were of the hackneyed version but that's expected nowadays from lackey, corporate controlled media. It was simply another, in a long line of specious attempts by pseudo-journalists to play the gotcha card on candidates that had already answered the questions presented ad nausea the past several weeks. Did we as American citizens learn much of anything from their rather narrow line of questioning? Of course not. There were no substantive questions asked in a way that would actually inform, educate, or illuminate the public's understanding of how political corruption and deception impact their everyday lives, from capitalist hegemony to how their government is complicit in killing of innocent Iraqi citizens. Just another version of big media adopting the TMZ, Youtube, Swift Boat culture of scandalous sound bites and infantile, tabloid fodder.

Sent by Ryan Gage | 11:18 AM ET | 04-18-2008

Yet another sign of the takeover of network news by the morning news/variety shows. Maybe Access Hollywood will conduct the next debate.
Richard

Sent by Richard Burton | 11:19 AM ET | 04-18-2008

I don't want to hear any more mud slinging. Just stick to important issues. Obama is right. We, the people, are smarter than ABC thinks. Shame on you, George Stephanopoulos!

Sent by Deena Poirier | 11:39 AM ET | 04-18-2008

Talk about "fair"...where were your voices when Clinton was constantly being pummeled by the media...so much for fair and objective...you guys sound bitter...

Sent by ard | 11:51 AM ET | 04-18-2008

Bruce Fein, the well respected, conservative, constitutional lawyer who worked for the Regan administration, says the Constitution of the U.S. is threatened by the policies of this administration. Forty Seven million Americans are still without healthcare. Bush and his gang began a war based on lies. This illegal war has killed and maimed tens of thousands of patriotic, selfless young Americans. Since the war began the price of oil has tripled and the economy is imploding on the backs of everybody but the top 1% wealthiest Americans, the friends of Charles and George, so the most important issue to these fat cat interviewers is whether they will have to pay a higher capital gains tax on their investment portfolios.... No wonder folks are bitter!

Sent by frank driscoll | 12:18 PM ET | 04-18-2008

It was really shameful that ABC Gibson and Stephanopoulos wasted so much time talking about gaffes and stupidities that will have no effect on America and the World rather than try to ask questions that would have enlightened viewers about the real issues - taxes, war, foreign relations, energy and the environment, nuclear proliferation, the economy, the banking and housing crisis, the national debt, social security, healthcare, foreign trade, etc.

The 'BBC World News' on BBC America is perhaps the only good news program left on TV. And it's the only "world news" program that actually talks about the world.

Sent by George | 1:04 PM ET | 04-18-2008

I am curious as to the ratings after the first 45min.

Sent by Michael W. May | 1:06 PM ET | 04-18-2008

ABC doesn't care about the issues of political importance. ABC cares about ABC's ratings. Why would we expect otherwise? ABC is in the entertainment business, not the journalism business. ABC would just love it if they could host a presidential mud wrestling contest. Can you imagine the ratings?

Sent by Gary | 1:14 PM ET | 04-18-2008

The "movement" is apoplectic because "Dear Leader" went potty in his big-boy underpants.

Just wait until the general election.

Sent by deek | 1:14 PM ET | 04-18-2008

After 40 minutes of this so called "debate", one had to wonder whether Gibson and Stephanolopous were interviewing for John Stewart's job. Fortunately we know that Stewart is fake news. Yeah, like my vote will be determined by a lapel pin, one phrase in a 30 minute sermon or a casual visit with a non-indicated weatherman. Gibson and Stephanolopous provided by ABC news which, like CBS and NBC pride themselves in bringing us the news in ten to thirty second snips. It clearly shows how these organizations in their efforts to keep ratings high also "dumb down America" in process.

Sent by Roger | 2:01 PM ET | 04-18-2008

A little link for you tim.

http://perfunction.typepad.com/perfunction/2008/04/little-tyrants.html

Sent by deek | 2:36 PM ET | 04-18-2008

@deek: while the collection in the link makes some abstruse connections to the point of tendentiousness, i will concede the point. my comment about revoking the license was over the top. so, i now disown and apologize for this part "i say revoke ABC affiliate licenses" . fair is fair.

(we could go off on a long tangent about cpb's tomlinson -- and yes, i know he was originally clinton's mistake -- but i'll resist)

I stand by all the rest unequivocally.

Sent by tim in exile | 3:44 PM ET | 04-18-2008

ABC did a great job, comparatively. At least Sen. Obama was finally questioned about a few things people have the right to know.

Sent by Susan | 7:02 PM ET | 04-18-2008

Susan:
"what do you mean by "right to know"? Do you mean "need to know" as with your favourite magazine, The Enquirer?

Do I have a license to badger you with my "right to know" why YOU do not wear a flag pin most of the time? Do we have reason to start worrying whenever you go to bed not wearing a flag pin?
---
Jeffrey Schneider said "With an audience that big, we're not surprised that there is a huge reaction," But does the reaction have to be predominantly negative? There are huge events that get rave responses and reviews.
This Schneider guy seems not to be bothered. Maybe he gets his big payoff when ABC goes under. And that will be enough to make laid-off nouveau-poor ABC workers bitter and go for religion and ...

Sent by chokora | 3:09 AM ET | 04-19-2008

Chokora:
I mean Sen. Obama has been given a pass in this election. The press has not done their job and thoroughly explored who he is, what he stands for, and what are his qualifications to be our president. This should have been done early on in this campaign, but like I said, he was given a pass. Now, at this late date, a few questions are finally being asked and he is not standing up well to them , and his supporters seem to be blaming ABC for his poor showing.

Now, I've got to run to the supermarket to get a copy of my favorite magazine, the Enquirer.

Sent by Susan | 1:57 PM ET | 04-19-2008

American Idol, Rock of Love II, Flavor of Love, and other reality shows have "big" audiences. That doesn't mean they're good shows. It's a sad day for democracy when a 'news' organization thinks a performance like that was worthwhile because it had a large audience. They're right. The "huge reaction" means a "huge" number of people witnessed your colossal stupidity. A news organization is only as good as its reputation. That type of programming is better suited for the spectacle genres, like Jerry Springer and other "reality" shows. Jerry Springer had a "huge" audience also. At least he didn't try to pretend to be something else.

Sent by Psmith | 7:06 PM ET | 04-19-2008

ABC thinks this debate content was relevant? I don't wear a flag pin. My minister, the last one I had, was a gem. I never had to run for cover in another country, except maybe from the rain. So I don't give a damn about those pieces of trivia.

It did cost me $45 to fill my gas tank on Friday for another week's worth of gasoline. We have more than 4000 dead in Iraq, 40,000 plus damaged bodies, and a generation of men and women with emotional issues as they return and our inadequacy in taking care of them. Our world economy and ecology are descending on our heads, hearts and wallets. The "greatest" country in the world refuses to educate, clothe, feed or provide health care for all of its citizens.

THOSE ARE IMPORTANT SUBJECTS.

Why don't we ask about them during the next debate. This one made everyone look like a bunch of weak minded fools.

Sent by Doug | 9:31 AM ET | 04-20-2008

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.







 (privacy policy)

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.



   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
Tom Regan

Tom Regan

Blogger

 
 
 

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.

 
 
Get My Vote promo

Share Your Story

What would it take to get your vote? Share text, audio or video.

 
 

 
 

Search the blog

 
 

Email Tom

If you would like to email Tom privately, please use our contact form.

 
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs