The second round of democratic presidential primary debates wrapped up last night, to be immediately followed by endless discussions about who one, who lost, who landed punches, who looked off balance. The format lends itself to sound bites and to some extent lets the interviewers of the hook by letting the contestants frame the issues. That drives scripted attacks in search of sound bites, trivializes the issues and highlights the divisions within the party.
None of the post debate analysis dug into the details of the policies being floated, so how is the viewer or reader to easily assess the merits of one vs another? What is missing is serious analysis of the kind Stephen Sackur practices so well. (And that's what makes the Beeb such a treasure)
No comments:
Post a Comment