Debate Disrespected Clinton, too.

It's been days since Tuesday's ABC News debate in Philadelphia between Obama and Clinton, and the dust still hasn't settled. From before the debate even ended, there has been a furor among media observers over the way the event was handled by ABC. The candidates' actual responses to questions have taken a backseat to the questions themselves, which some have considered so inane that the event has been widely dubbed "the worst debate ever."


Obama was the obvious target this time. As the frontrunner, it seemed reasonable that moderator (and, and must be pointed out, former Clinton aide) George Stephenopolis would go after him. However, the debate basically turned into a series of questions aimed at Obama. Much of the outrage has rightfully come from the nature of most of the questions: ABC chose to prioritize tabloid-style questions and superficial controversies over real issues. Obama was asked about American flag lapel pins, the "bitter" comment, Reverend Wright, and had his patriotism repeatedly challenged. It was not until the 16th question that Stephenopolis finally got to the economy -- even has he acknowledged it as "the number one issue in the country." Obama was justifiably upset over the line of questioning, which seemed designed to lower the discourse and ignore real problems in favor of the kind of artificial issues which the media has been churning out for years. This debate was so blatant in its insistence on muckraking that at one point, the crowd even turned on host Charles Gibson, assaulting him with a torrent of boos.

But Obama may have actually come out the better of the two. Not only did ABC's pitiful questioning fire up his base (as if they needed to be any more enthusiastic) the prevailing story ended up being "Media tries to screw Obama." The Illinois senator ended up looking like the victim of shameless yellow journalism. As for Hillary? She had a very different problem.


The moderator mostly went after Obama, with Clinton only getting a few token queries every now and then. On the surface, this may seem beneficial to the former First Lady: nothing wrong with staying out of the line of fire, right? Perhaps, but reducing Hillary to an afterthought in the debate sends the message that she doesn't really matter anymore. She was essentially treated as Obama's sparring partner on Tuesday, instead of as a legitimate candidate in her own right. And with the perception that she can't win growing by the day, Clinton can absolutly not afford to be ignored this way. Answering tough questions may be uncomfortable, but the alternative is to be saddled with the perception that you are such a political nonentity that you aren't worth questioning. At Tuesday's debate, Hillary was essentially told "you're just here as a foil for the frontrunner, so we'll go easy on you."

Over the past few weeks, Clinton has found the spotlight slowly dimming on her, even as it shines ever more brightly on Obama. The only major news story involving Clinton in the last month has been the sniper gaffe. Any other time she's in the news, it's in reaction to something Obama said or did. While the media is being increasingly hard on Obama, it is simultaneously reducing Hillary to an also-ran, as was the case on Tuesday. It is utterly crucial for her to maintain as much of that spotlight as she can in order to remain viable. But as is always the case when the media is involved, this is a problem which is largely out of the candidate's hands.