Quiet, Please

Now that I have criticized moderator Jim Lehrer of PBS for not mentioning mainland China during the September 26 presidential debate in Mississippi, I have to give him major credit for asking generally good questions and, more so, for asking something of the audience: to keep quiet.

Presidential, and other, debates are plagued by audience laughter and applause. Not ony does reaction by the audience interrupt the flow of debate, it skews the response of both the listening, and the voting, public. Television networks include a sound track in sitcoms for a reason: when the viewers hear laughter, they tend to laugh, or at least find the dialogue amusing. And supporters of a candidate know that if there is more favorable response to their candidate's comments than to those of his or her adversary, it will accrue to the benefit of their candidate, especially (though not exclusively) if that comment becomes a frequently-played soundbite.

Lehrer's admonition to the audience thus leveled the playing field. It also incidentally hurt candidate McCain, who is more at ease with a soundbite, especially a humorous one, than is Obama. Note these lines from the Arizona senator:

You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don’t know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers’ money.

I have fought against it. I was called the sheriff, by the — one of the senior members of the Appropriations Committee. I didn’t win Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate.

It’s well-known that I have not been elected Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate nor with the administration.

I’m not going to set the White House visitors schedule before I’m president of the United States. I don’t even have a seal yet.

So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, “We’re going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,” and we say, “No, you’re not”? Oh, please.

I looked into Mr. Putin’s eyes, and I saw three letters, a “K,” a “G,” and a “B.”

All of these- with the possible exception of the last- were intended to draw snickers, if not guffaws. Eliminating this reaction was a major step in honest, objective evaluation of the debate, especially in consideration of actual issues. If the Democratic nominee were better at doing stand-up, I'd be reluctant to praise Lehrer's approach- but I still wold.