Jim Lehrer looks ahead to Friday's presidential debate
One of the happiest developments in this increasingly partisan and hotly contested election is the fact that PBS' Jim Lehrer, the most trusted anchorperson on TV, will moderate the first presidential debate Friday night in Oxford, Miss.
If there is anyone in TV news who serves as a model for checking your ego at the dressing room door and trying to serve the public first when you are onstage, it's the 74-year-old newsman who will be at the helm of his 10th presidential debate when he stands between Senators Barack Obama and John McCain.
In an interview this week with The Baltimore Sun, Lehrer was crystal clear in his goals as moderator. He also talked about his health and concerns he has about journalists presenting ideologically charged commentary instead of verified facts and information to viewers -- especially during this once-in-a-lifetime election.
"The goal in the debate is to be a catalyst, really," Lehrer says. "It's about the candidates. It isn't about the moderator. It isn't about pressing the candidates. It's to make it possible for the people who are running for president to exchange their ideas rather than to bounce off mine."
"Fairness and the appearance of fairness are critical," he adds with emphasis, "because everything must appear to be absolutely straight and driven by the views of these people who want to be president rather than by some agenda that the moderator may have. This is not me saying, 'Hey I want to reveal this or I want do that.' This is a different purpose."
Lehrer, who moderated his first debate in 1988 between Michael Dukakis and George H.W. Bush, says the process has "changed dramatically" during the last two decades.
"The first one that I moderated included three other journalists on a panel, and the rule of engagement were very strict," he recalled. "You'd go from one journalist to the next asking a question, and there'd be one or two minutes for the response, and no follow-up. It was the same process that had been used in the first televised debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon (1960)."
Lehrer says the "experimenting" with format began in 1992, and he was asked to help with some of it during a debate involving Bill Clinton, H. Ross Perot and George H.W. Bush in East Lansing, Mich. He describes Friday's format as "wide open" and “freewheeling."
"It's the first time that things have been really loosened up -- where the candidates can direct questions to each other. There will be a question that goes to both of them, and they'll have two minutes each to answer. But then, there's five minutes that is wide open afterward -- for them to speak to each other, or me, the moderator, to ask follow-ups, then go to another question, etc.. And there will be nine segments like over almost 90 minutes."
As to the questions he will ask, Lehrer said in our Tuesday afternoon conversation that he had already had them in hand: "I have drafted them all -- and I've shared them with nobody, cleared them with nobody."
Nor did he share any with me. Nevertheless, I'll risk a prediction: Even though the debate is supposed to be limited to national security and foreign affairs, the economy will come up. Given the dire situation in which the country finds itself and the preoccupation most Americans rightfully have with their financial future, Lehrer will find a way to help citizens hear what these two men -- one of which will be charged with leading the nation out of crisis -- have to say about the economy.
As to his health after undergoing a heart valve procedure in April: "I'm feeling great," Lehrer says. "I have come back full strength plus or I would never have agreed to do this debate. I wouldn't be doing it if there was any lingering downside from my operation. It just worked perfectly. I feel good both physically and mentally. And I am delighted with how it all turned out."
And, finally, the newsman who has come to embody a journalism that seeks above all else to provide citizens with reliable information, weighed in on the movement among some cable news channels and other media operations toward highly partisan programming.
"I'm old fashioned-- I believe there is separation here," Lehrer said. "First, I'll tell you what happened. Then, I'll tell you the analysis of it. Then, I'll get you opinions from people to share. That's what it's all about. And when you cross those lines and you start blurring those lines, people don't know what you are and they don't know what to believe and whether to believe you at all."
(Above: Photo of Jim Lehrer moderating a 2004 debate courtesy of the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer)
Comments
I think this is exactly what our nation needed at this point. I think my generation has been taught by our babyboomer parents not to trust politicians and that not everything you see on TV is accurate. If Lehrer is as honest and level headed as he sounds i think he will do an incredible job of letting the country leave all skepticism for the politicians and actually allow the viewers to trust Lehrers judgment. Other aspects that will attribute to the viewers trust in Lehrer is that even if didn't know anything about his jounralistic style the image of an older man often equates with being wise and having been "In the game" a long time. His fairness will allow Americans to focus on whats really important...THE ELECTION
Posted by: Morgan | September 24, 2008 8:20 AM
The style of the political debate Lehrer describes is probably the best choice for any kind of debate, in my opinion. But that kind of debate is a length-driven kind, which can be afflicted with stall-tactics and fluff easier than the panel-style, two-minute-response-per-candidate debate. I know that virtually all debates would have the candidates using those tactics when faced with difficult questions that could put their views in a negative light or give their opponent an easy way to rebute them, so I can understand why Lehrer would want to use the open-ended debate rather than the shorter system. Ultimately, as long as Lehrer words the questions to make them as hard to squeeze out of than normal, then his choice of a debate system would be perfectly justified.
Posted by: Casey Lyon | September 24, 2008 9:38 AM
Hi Z,
First off, I have to say that I completely agree with you on this. Jim Lehrer is one of the few honest, and ego free political commentators you see out there. He's pretty moderate, not overly liberal nor overly conservative. There needs to be more people lke Jim Lehrer out there.
This election is one of the few elections ever that's all about division. You're either for Obama or your for McCain, no middle ground.
I think that's what's wrong with the media today especially in politics-too much bias. Some news sources are extremely right wing (Fox News) or left of Lenin (New York Time). So needless to say, that when you get your news from one of these sources, you will get blatant propaganda from whatever ideology the owners support.
What America needs is a change in the media. No more liberal/conservative media, just straight out reporting the facts (i.e. Newshour) and let the American public decide which views they support. Would you agree with me?
We're a divided country already. We do not need the news media encouraging more intolerance.
Hi I could not agree more. Thanks forn the insight and keen analysis. Z
Posted by: miskatonic86 | September 24, 2008 10:35 AM
The debate should go on to see
what regulations will be put on the financial institutions who have gotten us into this mess
I totally agree about debate going on. Check back with me a couple of more times today. I am going to post soon about it. Thanks. Z
Posted by: whynot | September 24, 2008 5:11 PM
Time to accept a scripted Presidential "debate" yet again?
Brought to you by your "good friends" on Wall Street.
No USA Main Street Paul or Nader,
nor Cynthia McKinney...
Posted by: OPEN REAL DEBATES | September 24, 2008 9:34 PM
I never liked Lehrer. I always felt like he was a pompous NPR elitist that feigns being middle of the road and accessible to all. The best we could hope for is gone. Tim Russert is the man who personified a good debate moderator. BTW, may be Palin can fill in for McCain this Friday. that would be cool.
Posted by: jim lagnese | September 24, 2008 10:21 PM
It seems across the spectrum of the "Blogsphere," there are two types of replies to the proposed "Debate/No Debate Issue." There are the reasoned, thought-out responses from both sides of the issues, and the ranting, raving replies from those that vent their spleen with un-informed, knee-jerk statements that actually detract from the discussion!
What happened to the "Put your mind in gear, BEFORE you engage your mouth," concept? Maybe our collective "Microwave Mentality" has gained the prominent view, we're too busy to gather FACTS, instead we search for views that confirm our "gut feelings," not taking the time to search for the MANY different views that will aid one in coming to a fair conclusion. Most especially in matters that are our "hot button" topics.
One would be very hard pressed to disagree that decisions based on EMOTION alone, have served any of us well, or if you think otherwise, you've lived a very different life from the rest of society!!
Posted by: John Whittenberg | September 25, 2008 9:37 AM
dear david, i respect jim lehrer's judgement. i have watched his news program for years on pbs. that's where i go to see an unbiased view of issues that other journalists cannot seem to comprehend the issue in a serious way. i don't want shallow words from journalists who are l00% controlled or even owned by a washington group! i appreciate the fact that he decides what his questions will be, and that on one knows what those questions are. he is just not out for high ratings, the other shallow news media are. it comes down to who owns what, and who writes their questions--a panel, a forum-or a shadow in the background. jim lehrer is the truth!!!!!!
Hi Pam, I could not agree more. I have the utmost respect for Jim Lehrer. I think he is absolutely the best there is in TV journalism. Thanks. Z
Posted by: pam bias | September 26, 2008 2:14 PM
dear david, i respect jim lehrer's judgement. i have watched his news program for years on pbs. that's where i go to see an unbiased view of issues that other journalists cannot seem to comprehend the issue in a serious way. i don't want shallow words from journalists who are l00% controlled or even owned by a washington group! i appreciate the fact that he decides what his questions will be, and that on one knows what those questions are. he is just not out for high ratings, the other shallow news media are. it comes down to who owns what, and who writes their questions--a panel, a forum-or a shadow in the background. jim lehrer is the truth!!!!!!
Hello Pam, I could not agree more. I have the utmost respect for Jim lehrer. He is the best in TV journalism. We are lucky to have him. Z
Posted by: pam bias | September 26, 2008 2:14 PM
i would like to find a website where i can ask questions that need to be asked during the debate. i hope jim lehrer will create one soon. i wish him the best.
Hi Pam, As Jim Lehrer said in my interview, he is drawing up the questions on his own and showing them to no one. Unlike some of the CNN debates, the audience cannot influence the questions that will be asked tonight. But I think you probably trust Lehrer to get it right on his own. I do.Z
Posted by: pam bias | September 26, 2008 2:24 PM
What the hell happened to the comment I just typed out,clicked on preview, tried to correct a spelling---and then it just disappeared!?
Hello, I think it got posted as the next comment. Is that it? Is it corrected? Thanks. Z
Posted by: Harvey Pearson | September 28, 2008 6:12 PM
A "truly" comprehensive immigration, etc., reform question for Jim Lehrer to ask Obama and McCain in their next debate would be: Do you think an immigration policy, which, according to recent E-4, mid-year 2000-2001, Census Bureau projections, shows us well on our way to actually becoming a nation of one Billion---repeat, one Billion!---people by 2089, makes sense for the American people and their posterity to support?
And if not, how would you change it?
Harvey Pearson
Los Angeles
Posted by: Harvey Pearson | September 28, 2008 6:24 PM
The mainstream press and news have lost their integrity. They continue to abuse their coverage and interviews with their liberal patrician view, instead of REPORTING the news. The liberal press/news definitely has an agenda to elect the candidate of the their choice, instead of presenting fair and balanced interviews, so the American people can make up their own minds about who the people of the United States want to represent them as President of the United States. You are doing a great disservice to this great country!
I will NOW watch FOX news and the evening shows from here on out. The liberal press/news has blown it with me. I cannot trust them to tell the truth or be impartial or objective. I want NEWS, NOT their opinions. Goodbye ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC,& PBS. We should all change the channel.
I will vote for the integrity, experience, wisdom, dedication, character, and the servant heart of John McCain (he has longevity in his blood line look at his mother), over the youth and the LACK of experience, LACK of judgment, and LACK of character of Obama, any day! I think that Republican DR. Martin Luther King Jr's Dream would be realized if Obama would NOT be elected on the 'Content of his character.'
Posted by: tomisha | September 30, 2008 12:56 PM
The mainstream press and news have lost their integrity. They continue to abuse their coverage and interviews with their liberal patrician view, instead of REPORTING the news. The liberal press/news definitely has an agenda to elect the candidate of the their choice, instead of presenting fair and balanced interviews, so the American people can make up their own minds about who the people of the United States want to represent them as President of the United States. You are doing a great disservice to this great country!
I will NOW watch FOX news and the evening shows from here on out. The liberal press/news has blown it with me. I cannot trust them to tell the truth or be impartial or objective. I want NEWS, NOT their opinions. Goodbye ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC,& PBS. We should all change the channel.
I will vote for the integrity, experience, wisdom, dedication, character, and the servant heart of John McCain (he has longevity in his blood line look at his mother), over the youth and the LACK of experience, LACK of judgment, and LACK of character of Obama, any day! I think that Republican DR. Martin Luther King Jr's Dream would be realized if Obama would NOT be elected on the 'Content of his character.'
Posted by: tomisha | September 30, 2008 12:56 PM
"I want NEWS, NOT their opinions. Goodbye ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC,& PBS. We should all change the channel."
Waits for other shoe to drop...
How is watching Fox News just getting the "Facts" and not getting opinion?
Ok so now all media has been diluted to the lowest common denominator, Liberal or Conservative. Try watching and reading all you can find. I watch not only Olbermann and Hannity but PBS on occasion and I listen to way too much Right wing propaganda than I care to admit. There is no liberal mainstream media. There is however the backlash media on the am dial here in Philadelphia. 24 hours a day 7 days a week on 1210 and 990 am in philly you can get Glen Beck, Mike Smerconish, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett, Hugh Hewitt, Denis Prager, Michael Medved, Dom Giordano, Sean Hannity, Bill Orielly, Laura Ingram, Mark Levin, Michael Savage and the list goes on. So please stop with this myth of a "LIBERAL BOOGIE MAN" The media is an amalgamation of Print TV Radio and the internet, there are thousands of ways to get news. From what I've seen most of the stories picked up by the "main stream or as Rush likes to call it the "drive by media" (Which I am inclined to agree with considering that in this 24 hour news cycle the news outlets are so hot to get something to fill airtime they will put almost anything to fill the void, thus leaving little time to really get in depth and do any real investigative journalism.) These stories come from the AP or Reuters, Fox is just as guilty of using these stories as any other outlet. The only difference it that they put the "Right" spin on the story. If you can honestly tell me that the Bubbleheads on Fox and Friends in the morning are anything more then partisan hacks, then I believe you have lost any objectivity or ability for critical thought. As I said I watch a lot of Keith Olbermann and the human air vacuum Chris Matthews I also watch Hannity and Colmes and Orielly. I feel I can usually glean a decent amount of Information from various to cut through Fox's fair and balanced crap as well as see when Olbermann has taken Leave of his senses. As a libertarian I don't really have a dog in this Election though I do tend to skew to the left a wee bit. I really liked McCain in 2000 but after the beating he took at the hands of his own party to insure the election of George W. Bush, I really have issues with his Character. Now with the Judgement part of your statement, I find the Sarah Palin pick over say a hugely popular Govenor Like Mitt Romney goes to his Judgement. Instead of a possible unifying VP he pandered to the Religious Right instead of someone with a proven track record. Besides his time in the Senate, what executive experience does John McCain have? Come to think of it, that may be the reason that so few Senators are elected to President after their time in washington. Whew.
Yes, whew. But thank you very much. Z
Posted by: Chris | October 1, 2008 3:28 PM