On Gwen Ifill, White Privilege and Working the Refs

Yeah, about that *cough* top-secret “pro-Obama” book by notoriously anodyne PBS anchor and longtime Beltway insider Gwen Ifill that has the usual suspects in a histrionic froth: Howie Kurtz quotes from his September 4th profile of Ifill, in which her upcoming book is discussed:

In The Post interview, Ifill said that as the daughter of a minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations, she recognized the historic nature of Obama’s candidacy. But, Ifill said, “I still don’t know if he’ll be a good president. I’m still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense.” She added: “No one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

Unfortunately, Kurtz’s post at The Trail doesn’t include the paragraph that originally preceded the quoted statement:

As Barack Obama was claiming the Democratic nomination in Denver, Ifill says, a white television reporter asked her: “Aren’t you just blown away by all of this?” She said she was not.

“Aren’t you in the tank?” the reporter wondered.

As Jamison Foser observes (h/t Steve Benen):

1) The October 7 presidential debate will be moderated by NBC’s Tom Brokaw, who currently serves as NBC’s liaison to the McCain campaign — while spreading pro-McCain misinformation on Meet the Press. In fact, the McCain campaign hand-picked Tom Brokaw to moderate the October 7 debate[…]

2) CBS’ Bob Schieffer moderated one of the 2004 debates, despite the fact that he is a longtime friend of George W. Bush who had previously acknowledged that his personal relationship with Bush made it difficult to cover him. Schieffer’s brother was a business partner of Bush’s before Bush became president — and Bush made him an ambassador.

DJ rewind:

“No one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

Bottom line:

To insinuate that Ifill, who’s likely to run a tough debate and ask serious questions, can’t be impartial is insulting to all African-Americans. Because y’know, THOSE people always side with their own.

Oh, and regarding the oh-so-impartial and objective (to say nothing of, um, credible) source of all this manufactured wingnut outrage, WorldNutDaily, Kurtz sardonically notes:

On the World Net site, the “Deal of the Day” is a $4.95 offer for what is described as the “Obama blockbuster: ‘Anatomy of Deceit.'” The Web site says the book “reveals” that “his brand of change is a hostile attack on the Judeo-Christian values and freedoms most Americans hold dear.”

What was that about a “conflict of interest”, Greta?

Related: Steve M has more on The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama, which he says, judging by the publishers description, “isn’t hero-worship — it’s analysis” and that even if Obama wins in November the book “isn’t going to be a bestseller — it’s just too poli-sci.”

4 Responses to “On Gwen Ifill, White Privilege and Working the Refs”

  1. gcotharn says:

    Fuck off, troll.

    – mb

  2. matttbastard says:

    gcotharn: do you actually do anything else, besides takeup bandwidth here with your bullshit? God-fucking-damn–this post is up for, what, less than 15 minutes? And *bam* there you are, doing your solemn duty for God and Party Country.

    Let’s get a few things straight:

    I don’t like you. I came to the conclusion quite some time ago that you aren’t interested in constructive discourse with ‘the other side’, and simply get off on derailing threads to your own trollish ends. Frankly, I don’t know why my fellow posters tolerate your constant spewing of near-verbatim GOP talking points.

    If I had my way, you would be turfed from this site before you can say “McCain points!!11one” Unfortunately, I don’t have such unilateral authority here. I do, however, have the authority to ban you from commenting on my posts.

    So, with all due respect, please don’t comment on any posts under my byline ever again.

    Any further comments from you will be immediately deleted.

    Toodles!

  3. Thomas Simonson says:

    Gwen Ifill, you’ve got to be kidding me if you think there is no conflict. Bill O’Reilly would have been 10 times less partial than Gwen. I can’t wait to see her BREAKTHROUGH. Impropriety, this defines it.

    T Simonson

  4. matttbastard says:

    Bill O’Reilly would have been 10 times less partial than Gwen.

    …”Because y’know, THOSE people always side with their own.”

    Stop spiking your Kool-Aid 1-to-1 with Everclear, you fucking wingnut toolbag–braincells don’t regenerate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook