When Tom Brokaw assumed the Meet The Press anchor seat earlier this year I commented the solid and fair work of Tim Russert would be replaced by that of a closet partisan who would not be able to keep his partisanship hidden. In observing Brokaw during the heat of the primaries before and after Russert's death I noticed Brokaw's dislike of MSNBC commentators Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews. At first I thought Brokaw was being fair and mature in checking Olbermann and Matthews when they, in Brokaw's opinion, veered too far off center. But as time went on and it became public knowledge that Brokaw was complaining to NBC top brass about Olbermann and Matthews my views toward Brokaw hardened.
Further suspicion regarding Brokaw crept in when NBC removed Olbermann and Matthews from their election-night chair positions and replaced them with David Gregory in the chair, with Olbermann and Matthews remaining as analysts only. It is well known that Gregory is a friend of Karl Rove (see last month's email with the YouTube of Gregory and Rove on stage dancing together as one visual example). This move by NBC came a few weeks after McCain and Company began complaining to NBC about what they claimed was unfair coverage by Andrea Mitchell, Olbermann and others. NBC's top brass bowed to the McCain camp's lies and whining as well as to, I assume, the pressure of NBC's conservative parent company General Electric. Never mind that Fox (Fixed) News is a pipeline to and from the White House on talking points, and that Sean Hannity is "instant messaged" talking points from conservative strategists during his TV show to give Hannity fuel and hate-based venom to spew into the living rooms of millions across the country.
My suspicions regarding what was actually transpiring within NBC solidified when others and I were sent a copy of a Sunday morning email exchange between a Meet The Press television viewer and NBC News President Steve Capus. Last Sunday 9/28, after a balanced show for most of the hour, Brokaw decided to quote the findings of a poll that stated McCain was winning the commander in chief test. No other poll was discussed even though other polls showed Obama leading in this category as well as others. The viewer wrote a very constructive email to Capus just after Meet The Press concluded. Capus responded to the viewer stating he would watch the show again and respond to the viewer. After viewing the show Capus quickly responded that the viewer must be biased because he could not find any bias in Brokaw's approach. The viewer responded back to Capus after she replayed the show on her DVR. She provided Brokaw quotes from the show and provided examples from previous shows she had saved on her DVR. Capus' return email was rude and very unprofessional as he was obviously irritated by the solid approach from the viewer and having his appointee Brokaw be called out. When the viewer then responded calling him out on his lack of professionalism and his inability to be anything other than curt and defensive, she included in her email her own credentials (61 year old female well seasoned in Washington, journalism and politics experience, familiar with Brokaw). Capus accused her of being politically motivated further showing his lack of maturity in his position as well as what happens when media leaders get pressed on fair journalism.
Just two days after Capus' antics, the NY Times let the cat out of the bag chronicling Brokaw's relationship as liaison between NBC and the McCain campaign. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/arts/television/30brok.html
Tomorrow night's debate has the potential to be a repeat of ABC's Stephanopoulos/Gibson hatchet job on Obama during the second-to-last Clinton/Obama primary debate. Obama is at a disadvantage going into this debate in that the onslaught of smear tactics the McCain camp has began the last three days is being done for the express purpose of irritating Obama in an effort and to have Obama appear during the debate as the "angry Black man" to independent voters that have swayed Obama's way since the first debate two weeks ago. The fact the debate format is of the "town hall" variety does not protect the debate from being jigged. Brokaw has the power. He can select which questions make it to the floor and which do not from what I understand. So it is conceivable a Rev. Wright type question can make the floor while a Keating 5 one will not, etc. It is conceivable the debate will be fair but I will be pleasantly surprised if that is what ends up happening.
So Obama must once again walk the fine line of being Presidential while effectively denouncing McCain. He will have to stand his ground and show direct force without being seen as angry. He will have to be "White while being Black" as some have put it. (See Andrew Sullivan's brilliant write up after the first debate regarding the difficulty of striking this balance http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/obama-and-debat.html ).
McCain will be conniving and tricky if the debate format and flow allows it. He will be rude and condescending where he can. Then he will sweeten to the audience at any chance given him. Traps will be laid.
A McCain campaign insider was quoted yesterday as saying "if we continue to talk about the economy we will lose." So they have chosen the hate, smear and fear low road instead. Let's see what road Brokaw takes.
