From an email received today:
Coakley Campaign Announces Participation In Three More Debates
Now Confirmed Five Debates In Five Week Period Prior To January 19 General Election;
Same Number Of Debates As 2002 And 2006 Gubernatorial Elections
Coakley today announced that the campaign has agreed to the following additional broadcast and radio debates:
· Debate hosted by WTKK, January 5
· Debate hosted by WGBY in Springfield, January 8
· Debate hosted by the Kennedy Institute, January 11
The five scheduled debates meet or exceed the total number of debates held in recent statewide elections. During the 2006 gubernatorial general election, there were five debates held in which all four candidates on the ballot participated. There were also five debates held in the 2002 gubernatorial general election. In the 2008 Senate race, there was one debate held in the general election.
The Coakley campaign said it was still continuing to work to schedule two additional possible debates hosted by WCVB-TV as well as a consortium of the Boston Globe, NECN, WBUR, WGBH and others.
does it still count as a debate? Really, I enjoy a energetic, thoughtful debate as much as anyone in the BMG universe. Nevertheless, do you the citizens of Massachusetts really need 5 televised press conferences…err…debates in Massachusetts to make an informed decision concerning our next U.S. Senator?
<
p>I am confident we do not. And if my favorite TV program, “Modern Family” on ABC on Wed night at 9 is preempted for the “the AG, the Flag Waver, and the Ron Paul Wannabee,” I will be calling into WCVB-TV to demand they pull the plug on these three blowhards and bring back Natalie and Chet for the 6:00 p.m news, Clark Booth on sports, and Dick Albert to do the weather.
Scott Brown’s wife works had interviews with both candidates about the debates on it’s 6:00 p.m. broadcast last night. They then went on to say that Martha Coakley had turned down the debate with Channel 5 because it would have been just Brown and Coakley, and that was the format their “sponsors” wanted. Who they hell are their sponsors for a debate, the Brown for Senate Committee?
<
p>Isn’t is the responsibility of a local TV station to sponsor the debate themselves because it’s in the public interest? I understand entering into negotiations with both camps to determine the format, but allowing unnamed sponsors to determine the format, and then implicitly criticizing Coakley for turning down a debate format that she had previously rejected smacks of extreme bias. Perhaps WCVB’s license should be questioned.
Although they usually preface any coverage stating that Brown is married to Huff, it is still blatantly obvious that their coverage is biased.