FNC Debate: Writes-ups 3…
Slate’s John Dickerson writes about last night’s extravaganza…
One of the winners of the second Republican debate was Fox News Channel. The network hosted the most interesting and innovative debate so far in this election season. Moderators asked probing questions of the 10 candidates and pressed those who ducked them. On some issues, this produced genuine moments of drama. Candidates dropped the usual false bonhomie and demonstrated passive aggression and even genuine aggression toward each other.
This isn’t to say it was a perfect night for Fox. Questioning on Iraq didn’t bring much insight. And if the questioning was serious—no questions that called for hand-raising or quirky topics—the set was goofy. In some kind of bizarre tribute to Bob Barker’s retirement, the debate was held on a game-show set from the ’70s. Each candidate stood in front of what looked like an illuminated block of ice. Midway through each candidate’s answer, a whooshing sound effect played as their name appeared on the screen. It was so loud it drowned out the candidate and made you want to duck for cover. When the candidates talked beyond their allotted time, a little bell rang, making it sound like somewhere a pastry had just popped up in the toaster.
Those technical problems are minor when viewed in the context of the wholedebate, particularly when compared to that vacuous debate moderated by that hyperactive Matthews.
It’s amazing people notice things that are not substantial. What mattered most were the voices of the candidates, whose views we heard from questions asked intelligently as they should be. FOX did a terrific job.
Comment by RGL — May 16, 2007 @ 2:57 pm