PressEthic

The Hartford Courant reports that Hartford CBS affiliate WFSB-TV, which is sponsoring the only debate that will include all five candidates running in Connecticut's high-stakes Senate race (Lamont vs. Lieberman redux), is barring reporters from other news outlets from the debate and retaining sole control over selection of audience members for the event.

In effect, WFSB-TV will monopolize the media coverage of the debate, and we are left to trust that the station will provide fair, objective coverage of the event. Generally, political debate broadcasts are straightforward, bland affairs. But in selecting which clips will be licensed to competing TV stations and to radio broadcasters, WFSB-TV could strongly influence the way the debate is portrayed in the media. Remember the infamous Howard Dean "scream" that was broadcast ad nauseam in the 2004 Presidential primaries? That mere guttural utterance arguably toppled Dean's impressive lead and undermined his candidacy, proving that such sound bites have a powerful ability to influence voters.

But never mind the post-debate hubbub. Consider how the use of camera angles, close-ups, and lighting subtly affect portrayals of those who appear on-camera. Because WFSB-TV will have sole control of these aspects of the full broadcast, we'll again have to trust that all candidates will receive equal camera treatment. Seem like a nit-picky concern? I'm sure Richard Nixon would disagree.

Moreover, it's important to note that the debate will be taped on Wednesday 18 October 2006, but withheld for more than a full day until it airs as a taped telecast on the evening of Thursday 19 October. But careful scanning of WFSB's website, which heavily promoted the debate, revealed no mention of this fact. The station merely glosses over this reality by specifying the date and time of the "broadcast" and neglecting to mention that the debate will actually take place a full 27 hours in advance.

This omission is problematic in and of itself -- in that it withholds information that would allow viewers/voters to have a fuller, more accurate sense of the debate itself. But in addition, viewers/voters should understand that post-debate statements from candidates may benefit from this delay, which effectively gives candidates and their advisors a full day to consider the content of the debate and formulate strategies for spinning their perceived strengths and weaknesses revealed in the course of the debate.

Indeed, the Courant quoted Richard Foley, Campaign Manager for Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger, who noted that a candidate could "cook up a face-saving explanation even before his gaffe goes on the air Thursday.'You could be un-spinning it...before you even spin it,'" Foley said.

According to the Courant, WFSB General Manager Klarn DePalma recently asserted that the debate reflects that station's "'commitment...to deliver news and information to viewers in Connecticut.'" Unfortunately, the actual events surrounding the broadcast of the debate seem to reflect a stronger commitment to opportunistic, cynical management of news and information.