The Looking Glass

Mediated Event

On October 15^th, 65.5 million Americans tuned in to watch the third and final presidential debate of the 2008 election (O’Callaghan). Each person came away with distinct impressions. Some called the debate “spirited” while others considered the debate to be a “disappointment” (Rutenberg; “The Last Debate”). Some felt that the debate was John McCain at his best; others resolved that Barack Obama outperformed him. Comments have critiqued and described nearly every aspect of the debate from Obama’s tax policy to McCain’s persistent blinking. Although no impression is wrong, each account fails to capture the true spirit of watching the event.

I had my own impressions going into the final presidential debate. In the week leading up to the event, Barack Obama gained a more definite lead in the polls. In order to boost his own campaign, John McCain relied on casting doubt in Obama’s capabilities as President. The debate played out like a sports game between archrivals John McCain and Barack Obama. Moderator Bob Schieffer served as referee, doling out the ball to be wrestled for amongst the two opposing teams.  It was a fierce and close match between competitors, yet heading into the second half, team McCain made a foul that cost him the game.

From the start, the debate was much more intense than previous debates. Obama and McCain laid out their positions and were quick to argue and question one another. McCain stated that Obama did nothing to repudiate attacks made by Congressman John Lewis that had been “so hurtful.” Obama responded that 100% of McCain’s ads have been negative, which led into an “it’s true, it’s not true” dispute.

However, as the debate progressed, McCain turned the event into a time slot for personal attacks on Obama. McCain associated Obama with William Ayers, “an old washed up terrorist,” and ACORN, an activist group that has been accused of voter registration fraud. While discussing free trade with Colombia, McCain commented that Obama would have to travel there in order to “understand it a lot better.” Obama appeared calm and confident, smiling or nodding his head during McCain’s comments. While Obama could have easily attacked McCain in return for the personal attacks that were made against him, he resisted. Obama clarified the attacks made against him before referring back to the issue at hand. McCain is responsible for straying from the issues and turning the debate into an attack. He put too much focus in ridiculing Obama and thus, McCain ruined his own image. Obama put it bluntly that “the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me.”

An article from the Washington Post describes the presidential debate in an entirely different manner. “The Last Debate: John, Barack, and Joe the Plumber, on the Future of the Country” sees the debate as a replay of the candidates’ different viewpoints, mentioning the discussion on free trade, governing agendas, and abortion. The article notes that despite moderator Bob Schieffer’s suggestion to “tell the people tonight some things that they haven’t heard,” both Barack Obama and John McCain failed to do so. It brings up Obama’s disappointing response to prioritizing and making adjustments based on the economic circumstances in the country. According to the article, Obama listed off everything that he thought was important but failed to really answer the question. In what could have been an interesting debate, the “fireworks fizzled” and left viewers feeling like “jurors in an interminable trial” (“The Last Debate”).

            My impressions of the debate versus the impressions given in the article are clearly contrasting opinions. Whereas I found the debate to be heated and full of personal attacks, the article describes the debate as disappointing. My impressions are opinionated and favor one candidate over another; the article gives an opinion without taking a definite position. Neither account is wrong; they come from different purposes and experiences in watching the debate. After gathering with fellow college students, my purpose in watching the debate was not so much to hear the candidates reiterate their positions on domestic policy, but to root for my candidate and boo and critique the opponent. The people I watched the debate with shaped and emphasized some of my overall impressions. While it would have been difficult to not notice John McCain’s blinking, seeing other people poke fun of him made it a more memorable part of my impressions of the debate.

A journalist’s perspective will be much more objective going into the debate. While my opinions will be shared in a casual setting amongst classmates and friends, his or her impressions will be published. The more biased an article appears to be, the less credibility it will be given. Thus, in order to represent the Washington Post as a credible source of information, the article makes the opinion that the debate was “disappointing,” yet is careful not to take sides.

My impression, the account given in “The Last Debate,” and any other account of the debate are all limited in how much can be conveyed to others. It would be impossible to describe everything that occurred in the final presidential debate. In describing the debate, all witnesses are forced to omit some information. A reader is then provided an incomplete description. Furthermore, all accounts lack the emotions associated with watching the debate. Words are limited and can only give so much insight into the event. No matter how often someone describes McCain’s incessant blinking, without seeing it in context a person cannot know the ridiculousness of it all. Words fail to capture the spirit and excitement from witnessing the event. In order to truly understand the presidential debate, or any event for that matter, one must see it to believe it.

Works Cited

“The Last Debate: John, Barack, and Joe the Plumber, on the Future of the Country.” Editorial. Washington Post. 16 Oct. 2008: A.18.

O’Callaghan, John. “Final McCain-Obama debate had 56.5 million viewers.” Washington

Post. 16 Oct. 2008. 27 Oct. 2008 .

Rutenberg, Jim. “Candidates Clash Over Character and Policy.” New York Times. 16 Oct 2008: A.19.

posted by Anonymous @ 2:16 PM