"The biggest pressure you have as a journalist ever is to make sure you get an answer to your question," said Ifill, whose crowded resume includes The New York Times, The Washington Post and NBC News. "That's what I'm focusing on — how to ask questions that elicit answers instead of spin, or in this case to elicit engagement between the two."I hope someone tells Gwen she is acting as a moderator and not a journalist. It is not her position to determine whether a response is spin or an actual answer to the question. The American people can determine that for themselves.
Conservatives and Republicans ought to be watching these moderator performances and questioning why they have allowed the Commission on Presidential Debates to choose only liberal journalists who put Republicans on the defensive and ask Democrats if they feel "personally attacked."http://powerlineblog.com/archives/008084.php
I hope our readers won't mind if I start with Ifill. Because we attack the MSM so often, it seems only fair to praise one of its members when praise is due, and it is certainly due tonight. I saw not the slightest hint of bias on Ifill's part. She asked mostly tough, mostly intelligent questions of both candidates, and somehow managed to be stern, friendly, and entertaining all at the same time. If she can keep it up, the presidential debates could be blessed for decades with that rarest of "brokers" -- one that is both fair and intelligent.
The above links provide 2 contrasting conservative perspectives on Gwen Ifill's performance 4 years ago in the VP debate. I was worried about her bias possibly affecting the debate when I first saw that she was going to be the moderator, but maybe I should give her the benefit of the doubt.