Bunch writes an excellent capsulization of the debacle that was advertised as a "debate." The trivialization of a debate, the willful ignoring of critical issues, the failure to inform the democracy, the slavish throwing of second and third hand slime balls from Hanity and Rove, the disgust felt by any discerning sober viewer - Bunch captures it. Corporate networks should not host debates, as Bunch observes, they should be organized independently from the biases of the right rich corporate heads of big media corporations. The very blatant slimy job of ABBBBC (Abject Blatant Bushie Boss BS Carping) helps make that clear. "An oath not to raise taxes," ...kiss my lips ABC.

How can these two pretend "journalists" face cameras in light of their "performances"? Obviously they enjoy eating. And unless they toe the right-wing philosophy of their Bushie bosses who own the media in America, it's good-bye gourmet cuisine, as well as what paycheck? A sad day for democracy. Intelligent people don't let themselves and their friends watch the news media.

Emotional and left biased, I can't give many points for style. But it does express widely held feelings about the debate, and manages to encapsulate the essence of what happened. This is one-sided but does not misrepresent the other side. Links to some sources. Could use more direct quotes.

On target critique of the conduct of the debate by an avowed liberal. It happens to coincide with my opinion.

a passionate rebuke to two mainstream media news reporters/commentators for how they conducted an important presidential candidate debate. whether the reader agrees or disagrees with the rebuke, it's not difficult to show that so often the media fails in its primary job: in this case to aid millions of voters by providing the information that's vital for them in making a choice for the leader of this nation. what seems hard to do is figure out how to make that happen. mr. bunch does offer some ideas about that.

I'm torn over this. I do agree with the point, but I also see the value in bringing to the surface many of these rightist talking points so that they may be clearly and effectively discredited. Obama was thereby able to make a salient point about how he is running against the politics of character assassination, evident at this very "debate." The author could have been more balanced on this, but somehow completely ignores the value of this approach. We can't just talk real issues unfortunately. We also have to speak to the AM radio and FOX news watchers from time to time. Thankfully, all the debates have not been this way.

It is a good OpEd piece. While it represents the views of the journalist, the content goes to the heart of why America has (In My Opinion) a sadly ignorant political constituancy. I too watched the "debate" (using the term loosley because moderators are now more manipulators, than objective non-partisans), and the avoidance of substance pointed out by Mr. Bunch was also a concern to me. My favorite reference is "The Art of Deception" by Nicholas Capaldi (a study in critical thinking). Opinion: Todays media practices boldly every deceptive tool described in Mr. Capaldi's work and the victims are the American general population who must rely on the media because their slavery has caused leisure time for research to vanish. Tass, ... More »

I say they should be consigned to Fox News and left to be irrelevant there. But, well said, and hear, hear.

This piece does a nice job of summarizing the anger and disappointment so many of us felt about the last debate.

You have captured my feelings about the debate. Thanks. As for comments about the liberal media. Get a grip. The vast majority of media in this country is conservative. In fact, what liberal media that exists needs to be more visible and more vocal to balance the conservative, unhelpful interviewers we saw last evening.

This opinion piece has little journalistic merit. The author gives no context for his claims of bias. He does not like what he saw, and that is it. No objective study of the media has ever suggested that ABC is anything other than leaning to the left. On what basis does the writer reach a conclusion that goes against every academic study on the subject?

Another reviewer suggests that the Dem candidates should repond to "questions" inserted by Fox News and the opposition. Nice idea in an honest medium, but the opposition is anything but honest. The "questions" are inserted only to drive the candidates "off message" and off the real issues, and besides, the candidates have already answered any such questions (at least any that make any sense) and have already debunked the nonsense. In any event, these "debates" have been a total failure from the start, unless one allows that the media, especially TV "news", have been working hard at controlling the electoral process - - in which case this article (written by a fellow news reporter) may be a small waker-upper to the arrogant ... More »