Jim Lehrer Defends Debate Moderating Performance

Monday, October 08, 2012

Jim Lehrer moderating the first debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/Getty)

It was Lehrer on Lehrer, when veteran PBS newsman Jim Lehrer stopped by The Brian Lehrer Show to explain the importance of presidential debates, stress the vital need for federal funding for public broadcasting and defend his own controversial moderating performance from the first Obama-Romney debate.

Lehrer was widely criticized for the way he moderated the debate, with many observers saying he didn’t do enough to challenge the candidates or control the flow of questions. He was also faulted for not bring up controversial comments the candidates made on the trail, such as Romney’s blunt discussion about the 47 percent. But Lehrer said that was intentional — he wanted the candidates to question one another.

“I was not there to do the challenging,” said Lehrer, who is also the author of Tension City: Inside the Presidential Debates. “I was there to facilitate the challenging, and if they weren't going to do that, I wasn't going to do the work for them.”

Lehrer resisted the chance to criticize President Obama’s performance — the agreed upon loser in the debate — admitting to Brian Lehrer, he was “dodging” the question.

While he believes the president’s job is to engage in foreign policy and create jobs, Lehrer noted the president can’t do any of that without the support of the American people. Debates, Lehrer said, can be a proving ground for just that.

“If you're going to be President of the United States, you better be able to stand up on your feet or sit down on your bottom and talk. And talk to the American people and talk to people who ask you questions in journalism,” Lehrer said.

Listen to Brian Lehrer's entire interview with Jim Lehrer below:


More in:

Comments [1]

Brenda Gibbs from St Albans, NY

Perhaps i am a bit naive, but why aren't microphones turned off when candidates speak longer than the alotted time. Obama could have done a better job at the debate, but Jim Lehrer allowed Romney to have the last word at almost every issue, making the gullible public think that Romney capped each issue. Romney's performance reminded me of Robert Preston's character in the MUSIC MAN -- fast talking salesman -- a talking head -- selling snake oll to a gullible public. Didn't anyone hear some of the nonsense Romney was spewing? If allowable, the Obama campaign should replay some of those statements, for example, his statement that the health care plan he promotes would also allow the children of the insured to stay on their plans for "WHATEVER". Is "whatever" a specific? Did no one else hear that? Why did Obama not rebuff Romney's idea that it would be great to allow Medicare recipients to privitize their coverage and select their insurance company -- what?...stay in the frying pan, or jump into the fire? The fact that Romney's performance, with no regard to substance, gave his campaign a boost, demonstrates the number of people who don't have a brain1

Oct. 08 2012 09:02 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.


Latest Newscast




WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public


Supported by