NYtimes: Matt Lauer Fields Storm of Criticism Over Clinton-Trump Forum

[spanone]

It was a high-stakes political moment, far from the chummier confines of the “Today” show and, for Matt Lauer, NBC’s stalwart of the morning, a chance to prove his broadcasting mettle on the presidential stage.

The consensus afterward was not kind.

Charged with overseeing a live prime-time forum with Donald J. Trump and Hillary Clinton — widely seen as a dry run of sorts for the coming presidential debates — Mr. Lauer found himself besieged on Wednesday evening by critics of all political stripes, who accused the anchor of unfairness, sloppiness and even sexism in his handling of the event.

Granted 30 minutes with each candidate, who appeared back-to-back at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum in Manhattan, Mr. Lauer devoted about a third of his time with Mrs. Clinton to questions about her use of a private email server, then seemed to rush through subsequent queries about weighty topics like domestic terror attacks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/matt-lauer-forum.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

[TeamPooka]

1. Lauer blew it. He should stick to interviewing Charlie Sheen. nt

[milestogo]

2. and other intellectual lightweights like Ryan Lochte.

[brush]

3. The silver lining is that the debate hosts know they'd better fact check or . . .

they'll also get barraged with criticism, especially that moron Chris Wallace who has already said he won't be "truth squading".

[renate]

6. that is really true

I'm glad that Lauer is getting this much crap about his lazy performance now, so that maybe the other moderators will be more on the ball.

[uponit7771]

11. +1

[stopbush]

4. NYT indicts itself and the media with this:

"Still, with the formal debates set to begin on Sept. 26, Mr. Lauer’s performance seemed to preview the troubles that television moderators could face in balancing fairness with accountability. Mr. Trump, with his Houdini-like ability to squirm out of direct answers, is a particularly tough subject for interviewers, who will be forced to determine on the fly when to interrupt with a prime-time fact-check. Chris Wallace, the Fox News anchor who will handle the third presidential debate, drew criticism this week when he said, “I don’t view my role as truth-squading."

A Houdini-like ability to squirm out of direct answers? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

Half of the country is sitting there, watching our inept, lazy, fucked-up media letting Trump get away with murder, shouting follow-up questions at their TV screens that a second-grader would have an easy time formulating. And yet our media can't even seem to say the words "you're lying" when the lies are as obvious as the size of Trump's ego.

I'll tell you what, NYT - let Joy Reid moderate a debate and we'll see just how "particularly tough subject for interviewers" Donald Trump is when confronted by an actual self-respecting journalist. We'll see how long Trump gets away with his lies and stupidities before he walks off the set in a cowardly huff.

Well, the Times just admitted what 98% of our media should admit: "we're not up to the job."

[KelleyKramer]

5. Wish I could rec this

That should be it's own post

Well said!

[Granny M]

7. If Trump pulls this out of the bag,

it's the media's fault. The down ticket races are really important. A Democratic congress will be the only hope.

[renate]

8. if people watching at home would be better moderators than the "professionals"

(and I think that most people with an ounce of perspicacity really would have been better than Matt Lauer was)
..., then that is an indictment of lazy-ass journalists who think that their job is done when they come to the end of their questions.

Any fool can ask a question. The professionalism is in the knowledge to challenge the answer.

[Boomerproud]

9. Great Post.

The media has been proving all along that all they want is $$$$$$$ (a horse race) instead of what deadly serious consequences this election means. TOTAL FAIL!!!!!

[uponit7771]

10. op worthy

[spanone]

12. the media wants president trump. period.

[napkinz]

13. K&R

[Johonny]

14. The problem with "debates" is that they are completely biased to a conservative world view

We debate a conservative world view and the conservative stated "problems" as the nominal starting point. We've done this for decades now and the media isn't going to change magically his cycle.

Trump has a natural advantage because his "twisted" view of the world is actually considered normal for the debate moderator. No one thinks twice if he lies about the economy, world affairs, terrorism threats and cares not at all for general welfare or health care. If we ever debated actual issues important to the American people's daily lives...the conservative candidates wouldn't know what to do.