The executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates is wary about all these demands that the moderators should be fact-checking everything the candidates say.
Janet Brown said today that she does not believe moderators should play a large role in fact-checking each candidate. Speaking with Brian Stelter on CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” Brown said the candidates should be the judges of what the other says. “I don’t think it’s a good idea to get the moderator into essentially serving as the Encyclopedia Britannica,” Brown said. “And I think it’s better for that person to facilitate, and to depend on the candidates to basically correct each other as they see fit.”
The first presidential debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, which you will be able to watch live here on MATZAV.COM, will take place tomorrow night.
WATCH:
{Matzav.com}
What a silly idea. The candidates fact-checking each other is useless, since they both play fast and loose with the most basic of facts. An impartial arbitrator – i.e. the moderator – absolutely should jump in and call out inaccuracies, especially since some major whoppers are all too likely to be told.
With the proposed format we can expect two huge liars to spend a major part of the debate calling each other liars (the one time they will undoubtedly be telling the truth).
The executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates is 100% correct. Moderators should moderate not fact-check because even moderators have personal and biased leanings unless the moderator is Brian Williams who always has accurate facts.
I think her name was “Crowley”, the “moderator” who pulled out a prepared argument to use against Romney when he debated Obama. She wasn’t even “factual” when it came down to it…