Current Events Watch

I watched the rebroadcast of last week’s CNN Democratic debate over the weekend. (Why, I don’t know … other than I have no social life.) In watching the encore presentation, it seemed even more apparent that the audience participation segment was nothing more than a blatantly scripted sham. Pathetically obvious, and not particularly well-directed by the CNN powers that be. So poorly done, in fact, that I’m rather surprised they would have chosen to air it a second time.

One especially disappointing performance: LaShannon Spencer (the one with the big purple cape around her neck … quite an accent piece.) I hope she didn’t quit her day job, because the fledgling actress was certainly less than stellar the other night, no doubt much to the dismay of the CNN producers charged with casting the roles of Undecided Voters. She may have aced the audition, but when it came time for her limelight debut, she flubbed big time. In a brain fart moment, when given mike time by CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux, she totally missed what was supposed to the be the point of her assigned question. She started promisingly enough …

“We constantly hear health care questions, and questions pertaining to the war. But we don’t hear questions pertaining to the Supreme Court justice or education. My question is, if you are elected president, what qualities must the appointee possess?”

… but under pressure forgot to bring up that whole abortion rights, Roe v. Wade vote thing. And on live TV! No second takes. Thank goodness, Suzanne (pronounced with the classier “ah”) Malveaux was still standing by, her improvisational acting prowess saving the day. Theatrical disaster averted. Perhaps a bit awkwardly, but at least she got the storyline back on track so that we, the viewers, would not miss what was intended to be a key plot point.

After duly reiterating and directing the question to Christopher Dodd, she managed to clarify what Ms. Spencer really meant to ask by adding whether or not he would “require nominees to support abortion rights.”

Whew! Close call, that was. Dialogue back on track. A textbook-worthy example to all aspiring cable news talking head wannabes on how to handle a would-be debacle on live television. In fact, I was so impressed with Malveaux’s adroit handling of the situation, I thought I might peruse the official CNN transcript in order to better-appreciate such fine work.

But, wait … dagnabbit! Apparently the network’s own transcriptionist wasn’t able to document that particular exchange, including Malveaux’s savvy save, due to all of the crosstalk. From the published CNN transcript:

(CROSSTALK) DODD: First of all, thanks for your question …

Readers of the CNN.com transcript who may have missed the live performance might wonder … what was the question? Whaaa…? Because the question, well, just isn’t there. Damned crosstalk! Fortunately not all political pundits are quite so hearing-impaired as the hosting network’s own recordkeeper. Others were, surprisingly enough, indeed able to hear and report for posterity the dialogue in its entirety, in spite of all of the crosstalking mayhem.

Sarcasm aside, the situation was so appallingly handled by Suzanne Malveaux that I wonder if CNN simply decided to do some selective editing of the official transcript. Because really, it does kind of make them look rather stupid. Particularly with veteran reporter Malveaux on the scene.

For the most part, the majority of the audience members nailed their lines, although I think a few may have stumbled a bit. A teleprompter might have come in handy. Most recovered fairly well, however. Overall, I’d give the second act two stars … except, of course, for LaShannon, who may never act in Vegas again.

At least Maria Luisa, in the role of final questioner, didn’t falter! You know, the one who asked the “diamonds or pearls” question of Hillary Clinton. She came through like a pro, despite the fact that this was an apparent last-minute script change by CNN due to time constraints. But all performers have their critics, and she has apparently been taking a lot of flack for the frivolous nature of the question. Hey, y’all, back off! She was just following the director’s orders! That’s what great actors do.

As reported here by The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder, according to Ms. Luisa, every question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN. She was asked to add some lighthearted and fun questions to the mix. Originally, it seems, TPTB had decided to weed out the frivolous, and instead approved Luisa’s prefered question, regarding the nuclear dump that is Yucca Mountain, an issue that she truly thought important.

Unfortunately, time ran short, and according to an excerpt from her MySpace page:

“CNN ran out of time and used me to close the debate with the pearls/diamonds question. Seconds later this girl comes up to me and says, ‘you gave our school a bad reputation.’ Well, I had to explain to her that every question from the audience was pre-planned and censored … See, the media chose what they wanted, not what the people or audience really wanted.”

The media pre-planning and censoring questions? Really? Well, surprise, surprise!

cnn, democratic debate, 2008 election, malveaux, cnn debate