Comments on: Candidates Cut From Debates http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/ Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:40:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Chris Leonard http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-191 Chris Leonard Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:24:16 +0000 http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-191 @Liz So, I've given it some thought, and I definitely see your point. Fox is a privately held news source, and they've invited candidates to a panel discussion. Based on that, they get to choose who they want to speak. I still assert that, as you point out, this is not fair and balanced. I've seen news stories since then that in addition to all of the individuals that have spoken on behalf of the candidates, Fox affiliate stations were calling the Fox headquarters encouraging them to reconsider, and rather than listen, they closed their eyes and ears and dug their heels in. In the end, I think this was ultimately a boon for the one candidate that I would have wanted there, Dr Ron Paul. Dr Paul has received more press coverage due to being excluded, than the candidates who were actually present. So, the result is that Fox gave a voice to the one candidate they wanted to squelch, and pissed off a lot of people in the process. I'd call that fair and balanced. @Liz
So, I’ve given it some thought, and I definitely see your point. Fox is a privately held news source, and they’ve invited candidates to a panel discussion. Based on that, they get to choose who they want to speak. I still assert that, as you point out, this is not fair and balanced. I’ve seen news stories since then that in addition to all of the individuals that have spoken on behalf of the candidates, Fox affiliate stations were calling the Fox headquarters encouraging them to reconsider, and rather than listen, they closed their eyes and ears and dug their heels in.

In the end, I think this was ultimately a boon for the one candidate that I would have wanted there, Dr Ron Paul. Dr Paul has received more press coverage due to being excluded, than the candidates who were actually present. So, the result is that Fox gave a voice to the one candidate they wanted to squelch, and pissed off a lot of people in the process. I’d call that fair and balanced.

]]> By: Liz http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-190 Liz Sun, 06 Jan 2008 21:57:02 +0000 http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-190 At first I thought this wasn't such a big deal. With so many candidates, it's hard to give enough time to any one candidate to get much deeper than the content of their ads and press releases. Besides, Fox and ABC are hosting the debate, so I don't have a problem with the notion that they get to decide who's invited. ABC's criteria seems fairly logical, but I disagree with Fox's basis for their decision. If Fox only considered the results in IA, I agree with the point, "why should the results in Iowa determine the participants in the last debate before the NH primary?" The polls show that the results in NH will most certainly differ from those in IA. Paul is likely to be a factor, so he should be part of the debate. I don't think this is censorship, I just think it's a poor decision on behalf of Fox that is not compatible with their claim to be "fair and balanced." It definitely doesn't fall in line with "We report. You decide." At first I thought this wasn’t such a big deal. With so many candidates, it’s hard to give enough time to any one candidate to get much deeper than the content of their ads and press releases. Besides, Fox and ABC are hosting the debate, so I don’t have a problem with the notion that they get to decide who’s invited. ABC’s criteria seems fairly logical, but I disagree with Fox’s basis for their decision. If Fox only considered the results in IA, I agree with the point, “why should the results in Iowa determine the participants in the last debate before the NH primary?” The polls show that the results in NH will most certainly differ from those in IA. Paul is likely to be a factor, so he should be part of the debate. I don’t think this is censorship, I just think it’s a poor decision on behalf of Fox that is not compatible with their claim to be “fair and balanced.” It definitely doesn’t fall in line with “We report. You decide.”

]]> By: MikeMc http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-187 MikeMc Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:23:56 +0000 http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-187 The New Hampshire GOP just withdrew from being a Fox forum partner. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080105/ap_po/on_the2008_trail_3 The New Hampshire GOP just withdrew from being a Fox forum partner.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080105/ap_po/on_the2008_trail_3

]]> By: Chris Leonard http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-186 Chris Leonard Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:32:30 +0000 http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-186 I think you're probably right on both counts. I don't fully understand why people are afraid of Ron Paul though. He's not your standard politician, but his constituents in Texas are pleased enough to keep him in office for several terms. I think you’re probably right on both counts. I don’t fully understand why people are afraid of Ron Paul though. He’s not your standard politician, but his constituents in Texas are pleased enough to keep him in office for several terms.

]]> By: Jan http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-185 Jan Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:26:08 +0000 http://www.seeyadubya.com/01-05-2008/candidates-cut-from-debates/#comment-185 They are affraid of Ron Paul :) just stop watching tv. They are affraid of Ron Paul :) just stop watching tv.

]]>