DebateDebateDebate...

So I watched the debate last Friday night, and then awaited the expected barrage of media opinions and criticisms. I have to say though…I didn’t see too much bombastic writing in the mainstream online newspapers. Even though most noted that both McCain and Obama both took jabs at the other in one topic or another, many called the debate a “draw” for both candidates with no clear winner. I think that the media’s position on this event is correct, considering the debate itself. I also it correct in the sense that the media’s position isn’t tarnishing the public’s opinion of the event itself with writer’s own strong opinions. I admit that choosing certain sound bytes or video clips by the media for the public to consume is in itself an imposition of an editor or writer’s opinion, and that is inevitable. What really gets to me is when writers of newspaper articles (NOT editorials, I might add!) are so intent on spewing their own opinions in what I consider to be an area of the news that is meant to be as “objective” as possible. But I digress…
One of the elements that I find most helpful in watching this debate and understanding the effects of certain events on public opinion are the variety of polls that are found in graph format online. The most useful visual I’ve found is on the BBC website, since it shows a variety of polls and how public opinion has shifted over time (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/7360265.stm). The polls allow the public to see what other Americans think of the presidential candidates without the direct opinions of the media inserted into the information.
I guess as I write this I realize that I am wary of the opinions of the media, since they are such a small community in relation to the billions of people in the world, as Charlie Beckett describes in “Supermedia.” Am I paranoid? Should we all be listening to these people simply because they chose this profession? What do you think?