Looks like Shales agrees with most everyone else.

In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC

By Tom Shales
Thursday, April 17, 2008; C01

When
Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic
candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the
2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network
news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances.

For
the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson
and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that
already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the
candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer
news. Some were barely news to begin with.

The fact is, cable networks CNN and MSNBC
both did better jobs with earlier candidate debates. Also, neither of
those cable networks, if memory serves, rushed to a commercial break
just five minutes into the proceedings, after giving each candidate a
tiny, token moment to make an opening statement. Cable news is indeed
taking over from network news, and merely by being competent.

Gibson
sat there peering down at the candidates over glasses perched on the
end of his nose, looking prosecutorial and at times portraying himself
as a spokesman for the working class. Blunderingly he addressed an
early question, about whether each would be willing to serve as the
other's running mate, "to both of you," which is simple ineptitude or
bad manners. It was his job to indicate which candidate should answer
first. When, understandably, both waited politely for the other to
talk, Gibson said snidely, "Don't all speak at once."

For that
matter, the running-mate question that Gibson made such a big deal over
was decidedly not a big deal -- especially since Wolf Blitzer asked it during a previous debate televised and produced by CNN.

The
boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday
morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly
"World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a
subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky
and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama
once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40
years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation.

Obama
was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being
bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any
misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech
or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been
to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said.

No sooner
was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial
ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've
discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried
to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks
would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some
other baloney.

This is precisely what has happened with widely
reported comments that Obama made about working-class people "clinging"
to religion and guns during these times of cynicism about their federal
government.

"It's not the first time I made a misstatement that
was mangled up, and it won't be the last," said Obama, with refreshing
candor. But candor is dangerous in a national campaign, what with
network newsniks waiting for mistakes or foul-ups like dogs panting for
treats after performing a trick. The networks' trick is covering an
election with as little emphasis on issues as possible, then blaming
everyone else for failing to focus on "the issues."

Some news may
have come out of the debate (ABC News will pretend it did a great job
on today's edition of its soppy, soap-operatic "Good Morning America"). Asked point-blank if she thought Obama could defeat presumptive Republican contender John McCain
in the general election, Clinton said, "Yes, yes, yes," in apparent
contrast to previous remarks in which she reportedly told other
Democrats that Obama could never win. And in turn, Obama said that
Clinton could "absolutely" win against McCain.

To this observer,
ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several
times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter,
Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center.
Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression
that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to
pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates
made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen
before the first commercial break.

At the end, Gibson pompously
thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back?
-- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to
his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low
he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer.