RE “THE Brown-Warren debate up close” by Jon Keller (Op-ed, Sept. 26): What are the ethics involved in a moderator for a political debate using backstage information and his own analysis of the debate in an opinion piece?
As moderator, Keller was clearly not in the role of reporter at the debate between Senator Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren.
Comments
I agree. I found Jon Keller's opinion on the debate inappropriate. I'm not sure what the motivation was except to make it seem like Scott Brown was too busy with the country's work to be relaxed and confident. Why did Jon Keller feel the need to write this piece and why did the Globe think it was worthy of printing?
Perhaps now Keller has revealed his long term support for Republican candidates. I could never understand why channel 4 put someone so biased in charge of their supposed even handed election coverage.
Surely there has to be a more skilled and less self-involved commentator to act as a moderator in a public foum of this kind. In a state like Massachusetts, and in a race with so much national attention, it is ridiculous that Keller is the best we have to offer. His lack of discretion in revealing backstage moments is the worst.
Having observed Keller's conservative POV in his editorial rants on channel 4, it was clear that he was a poor choice to moderate the debate. This has been proven to be correct. Just whose bright idea was this, anyway?
More leftnut whinging. Just because Jon Keller's analysis after the debate isn't what you wanted to hear doesn't mean he was not an impartial moderator. He saved his personal commentary for after the debate, as he should have.
Jim Lehrer never did what Keller did. A year ago I attended a book reading given by Lehrer at the Brattle Theatre. At no time did he compromise himself by revealing back stage info on the many debates he hosted. John Keller, otherwise an excellent political commentator, could learn from Lehrer.