ABOUT THIS BLOG

The Daily Nightly began on May 31, 2005. As Brian wrote in his first post it aims to provide a narrative of the broadcast day and a window into the editorial process at NBC Nightly News. Brian weighs in every weekday and NBC News correspondents and producers post regularly.

Brian Williams became the seventh anchor and managing editor in the history of NBC Nightly News on December 2, 2004. Read his full biography.



Can black journalists cover Obama fairly?

Posted: Friday, July 25, 2008 10:26 AM by Barbara Raab
Filed Under:

By Mara Schiavocampo, Nightly News Digital Correspondent

All this week, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm in Chicago for the Unity Convention. Every four years a coalition of four organizations (the national associations of Black, Hispanic, Native American and Asian American journalists) hold a joint convention. This year organizers expect about 10,000 people.

A few days before the convention began, it was announced that Senator Barack Obama will be speaking here on Sunday. Sunday just happens to be the last day of the convention, when most people return home. So a lot of folks who may have wanted to hear the Senator speak will miss it. Others are scrambling to change their travel plans at the last minute. (Senator McCain was invited but declined, citing travel obligations.)

When it comes to Senator Obama, one issue we as Black journalists face is that of a perceived bias in favor of his candidacy. Many African Americans -- journalists and non-journalists, conservatives and liberals alike -- admit that Obama's success inspires great pride.

So I asked a question of some my colleagues here at the convention: Can Black journalists cover Obama in an unbiased way? Here's what some of them said:

Marcus Mabry, Assistant Business Editor, New York Times and author of "Twice As Good: Condoleezza Rice and Her Path to Power":

"Is a Republican journalist unable to cover George W. Bush? Part of being a journalist is being able to put your personal feelings aside to do your job. According to polls, a plurality of White Americans support John McCain. Does that mean no White reporters should cover John McCain?"

Nicole Childers, Executive Producer, NPR News & Notes:

"I think it's definitely a symbolic victory for all African Americans. I do think it requires us to be extra diligent… in making sure that [the coverage] is balanced."

Carole Simpson, former Anchor, ABC News:

"Yes, yes, of course I feel proud of him. I'm happy and I'm proud that someone has been able to do it. I just hope he can back it up.

"You're a reporter and you have to be objective and you have to be fair and you have to tell the good and the bad of who you're covering or you're not doing your job."

Patrick Riley, Pop culture blogger and freelance producer:

"I think it's quite accurate that Blacks are across the board proud of this moment because it is history. So, hands down, I think most journalists are just that: proud as all get-out. I empathize with those journalists that are bound by their objectivity…because I know they just want to scream and holler. I know they do."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Question asked, is not deserving of a response.

Evander Duck (Sent Friday, July 25, 2008 10:44 PM)

This was a ridiculous question and the color of the reporters skin makes no difference.  In the same way that some women have acted against women's rights and interests (anti-choice, Brooke Hogan's recent comments on women being unsuitable for presidency)so can a black reporter to her own detriment, so to speak.  One doesn't have to create the system to perpetrate it.  Mabry got it right.

C., GA. (Sent Friday, July 25, 2008 10:52 PM)

I think it is pretty telling that many of the responses run along the lines of "How dare you ask that question?"

Dave (Sent Friday, July 25, 2008 11:06 PM)

Here is something I don't get. Question, if I were an american journalist covering the Olympics and someone said I would be bias in my coverage of the Olympics because I was proud of my country, I would say they were crazy. Why would I slant my coverage just because I was proud of the USA. It is ridiclous to me that anyone would think that as a journalist I would not be capable of seperating my pride from my duty as a journalist. Think about it, this is the same thing everyone is discussing here.

Stuckey, NC (Sent Friday, July 25, 2008 11:34 PM)

Im tired of the media acting like Obama is the next Massiah. I dont think anyone is reporting "honestly" about him. Its all hype, Obama the "rock star". Obama gets dap from michelle. I cant wait for him to lose already

Lee, Alliance, oh (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:03 AM)

With surprise that I can comment this late in the game:

I've fully enjoyed the entire comment section. It shows the beautiful spectrum of people not only concerned with their own lives, but also concerned about the direction of their beloved (if not most corrupt) country.

Folks, this question is both valid and invalid... However, I think that the ultimate perception of this article is whether or not it is an appropriate question to be had at this time in American History...

As most would agree, Blacks (African-Americans...I practically despise this division, by the way) have been free for a little over forty years--maybe fifty... Let's not forget that Martin Luther King died in 1968 and that blacks were still struggling for equality... and blacks are still struggling for equality.

The question here is whether or not this "equality" is an illusion or not... What truly is equality, and how does it relate to the world, country, and communities that we reside in?

In the course of the world, America will eventually come to a point of equality-through-experience. It is the only way that "equality" can be had. As many of you realize, to inform yourself NOT to do something, is almost more powerful than informing yourself to accomplish something...think "smoking" "fornicating" "evil".

Getting back (digressing from my ideological monologue), as quite a few have said, it is unfair to our society to continue identifying with separatist labelling in regards to our society. I have been over seas and Americans are seen as nothing more--nor less--than Americans. Period...

"Brothas" are addressed as "Brothas" and "Whiteys" are treated as such, but, in the end, we are seen as "Americans." Why do we not see things this way? Television, media, blah blah...are responsible. We know this. However, we are limited to these forces of society. We can read and learn through experience, but ultimately, the desire to understand has to originate in the individual...

This is the true source of change and progression: within.

So, folks, truly... Keep learning and progressing your thoughts... The universe rejoices...

Eventually, we will need to come together as the beautiful species that we are to take on the aliens who want to devour our brains... :-)

Until later...

Aaron G., NM (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:06 AM)

Wow.
It seems like a few people here are pulling a Fox news and are interpreting answers with personal conjecture.
To educate those few people I'll admit my personal experiences of the presidential race. I can say truthfully I didn't think he was going to get far because America is very racist. Once he proved he wasn't another Jesse Jackson and started to show the media he can verbally handle himself then he got my attention. I wanted to vote for Dennis Kucinich but he didn't make the cut.
I support Obama not because he's black (I'm black as well) but because I'm a Democrat.
Most intelligent people (i'd like to believe) don't subscribe to tribalism.

Neil R, Chester PA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:13 AM)

This is a fair question but not for the reason you think. The problem is that many African Americans (and some white) will vote for Barack Obama solely because he is black, and not for his qualifications or stance on the issues. The same would have been the case if Hillary would have been the nominee and have been the first woman potential President. In the past the candidates were always white men, so race was not an issue in the election or the news coverage there of. Any race or gender person covering the candidates had no way to be biased except on the issues. Now before all the hate mails that are sure to follow this, I will say that if I were in the position to possibly have the first person of my gender or my race to potentially be president I would have to "check" myself to understand exactly what is most important. Is it the historical moment, or the future of my country. Remember people this is not a vote to determine the winner of "Star Search", understand that this person (whomever it is) will hold the keys to our (YOUR) future for at least 4 years. Think about it.

Reese, Shreveport, La. (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:31 AM)

Realisticy the way that seems logical, is that one can not fit a square peg into a round hole. A over zealous people can not see outside their own overwhelmnes. They become guick to cling to their own hangups of unequality and been downtrodden all my life, phycological block. Like the fella who decries that he would never be comsume by the fever of gold; Yet when he comes close enought to its majic attraction pull, he goes hog wild!

newsnut,houston,texas (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:49 AM)

This should not be questioned. Blacks people (journalists included) have allways had their own minds and thoughts when asked to express their points of views on any subject. Ms Schiavocampo is saying what the neocons and anti Obama supporter think. When people of color advance in a society that is constructed for them to fail the narrow minded people will look to make lies their reality. These people think a jury of Blacks people peers are a group of 12 Whites and a White judge.

Jas Land, Sierra Vista , AZ (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:52 AM)

I can only concur with some of the reader responses: Can whites report fairly when it comes to others? As it were, one has to expand this question: can white people report fairly on anybody? Stupid question, is it? So is the question whether black reporters can be unbiased when it comes to reporting on blacks. As usual, it all boils down to the individual, for, collectively speaking, in the collective Euro-American and, actually, generally white context, no matter where on this planet, we have been seeing a preponderance of unfair, biased, distorted reporting etc. for centuries. Guess we should first question that before we worry about black or any other bias...

Beate Kaebel, Stuttgart, Germany (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:18 AM)

Ask bloody relevant questions you cheap-thrill seeking reporter! Is this how you think you'll climb your way to noteriety? Go work for the National Enquirer instead. Do you have reinforce in people's minds the notion that blacks mindlessly go by colour skin allegiance alone without any analytical thought process.....

It's this moronic line of thought you are indulging in that cost Clinton her election; First she pissed off her loyal black support by insulting them AND then to counter their switch to the more noble candidate Obama [not a skin loyalty based switch as the media sensationalized into being], Shrillary set out to rally latinos and 'hard-working' whites against her former support - her success in such divisive tactics is what's making the race between Obama and McCain closer than it should've been.

So once again- instead of grinning stupidly at these responses of outrage to your racially-demeaning idiocy, start writing compelling articles that lifts the complexity of your own thought process. With this article your reputation amongst peers is shallow and in the gutter. Rush Limbaugh must be applauding you and telling his audience of thick-headed stooges to read your article/query and saying "See -Even 'those people' say they professional journalists are being racist in favour of Obama".

joey (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:15 AM)

The totality of the story of the U.S. (as opposed to the history ------ his-story ------ of the U.S.) demonstrates it Fuzzy Q. Jones.  The pathological denial of that story, for instance, is at the base of why notions such as "an honest dialogue on race" will continue to be strongly resisted by the status quo.

Quite frankly, the question was answered "right out of the gate", albeit by inference. Indeed, every one of the answers, I opine, assumed that it was, in effect, a rhetorical question but provided effective answers anyway. I suspect that each respondent could have taken the path of silly question. I further suspect that the question was posed as one that's out there, with the full knowledge that it was, indeed, silly.

Finally, to take Mr. Mabry's notion one step further: Twice as good ---- to obtain half the deserved credit. Ah, but for thoroughbreds, on an individual level, that's just motivation, albeit that passivity as regards social injustices should be eschewed.

POLpursun (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:22 AM)

I agree with the fact that it all depends on the individual reporter. There's this African-American female republican analyst on CNN's "the campaign trail" who rips Obama apart every week with such relish....she certainly doesn't care that they are the same color, she just does her job (maybe too well).
Then there are the several grey haired, white, old men reporting glowingly about John McCain and knee-capping Obama every chance they get(Lou Dobbs, Jim Clancy to name a few). Could it be because they look like McCain.....hard to tell.

kay (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:51 AM)

As a 55 year old Black man who is not a reporter, I believe that Black Journalist can be objective. However I also recognize that all journalist are not the same. That is. that Black journalist, like their White counterparts bring different interview skills to the table. Not everyone can be a Tim Russert and therfore the public will generally make judgements based on the talents of the interviewer, and attribute it to bias.

William Gilliam, Emporia, KS (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:53 AM)

The question should be "Can half-white, half-black reporters with a Muslim father and a Christian mother truly and honestly cover a politician of similar background." Perhaps a second question should be "Can a politician who has been imprisoned for years by an enemy of the US be an impartial president."

Milt Long, Conyers GA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 9:08 AM)

I have yet to hear an African American pro Obama TV commenntator that his thin resume might give a person pause. I am not talking about his lack of experience-but his lack of significant contribution in any job he ever held.  I live in Chicago, and from time to time come across African Americans who live in his neighborhood.  They acknowledge that Obama never did too much for his community, that the content and tone of Rev. Wright's statements are well known in the communit - even by those who dont' attend the church - but I never hear pro - Obama Arican American commentators suggest that his vacuous and vapid work history may be a reason people may not vote for him - the assumption is that racism is at work.  

I personnally would like to see the broad cast media have an open discussion of Obama's resume and discuss whether his contribution in any of positions outweights the benefit he has received from his position.  I think we all know that He got more out of being a US Senator than the people of Illinois or the country. Having researched his work history carefully - I have concluded that it is the same in every job.  Anyone who knows anything different I invite to post some specifics.  Believe me, Obama has never exhibited an interst in governing in his elected positions and won't change as President.

Mary OK (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 9:48 AM)

The issue ignored by the question and the responses is, 90% of the media, REGARDLESS of race, are not covering Obama fairly.  They are completely in his camp and are using their positions to get him elected.  Political donations by members of the mainstream media are 100:1 in favor of Democrats, and that was BEFORE this election.  

White, black, purple with green polka dots- it doesn't matter what race the reporter is.  The coverage is biased.  

EMT East Coast (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 10:15 AM)

I am sick to death of being labeled a racist because I am not voting for Barak Obama. It's obvious to me that the man simply does not have the qualifications to be president. A one term junior Senator from IL who has spent the last two years campaigning just doesn't have the experience to be commander in chief.

As to question about objectivity...you need not look any further than what happened to Tavis Smiley. I haven't found any negative reporting on Obama from a black journalist. Nor have I found any negative reporting on Obama from any liberal journalist. Prejudice and racism is alive and well in this country, but it goes both ways. When nearly 100% of blacks say they are voting for Obama and his white liberal supporters are calling anybody who questions his qualifications a bigot and a racist, then to me the question was not only fair it was quite relevant. And should have included whether liberal journalists can cover Obama objectively.

Arby, Seattle WA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 10:31 AM)

Can a white dentist fill a black man's tooth properly.

Dr. Yazdi (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 11:44 AM)

Sorry, every black person in America is multi-racial - so what do they mean when they say he has a white mother? I could safely estimate that at least one-third of the second generation of Africans born on this soil was the exact racial make-up as Senator Obama by the time the white slave traders and owners finished getting started with mixing it up with us. The only difference is that some of our families became mixed early in our history (98% of black people)and some of our families became mixed late in our history (Sen. Obama and others). So what are people meaning by this? Just a walk downtown during evening rush hour, and observing the widely different skin tones of black people reveals the obvious - there are no racially pure (African) black people in this country! Sen. Obama is truly one of us! If the senator was not whom he is and just walking down the street, he would not be assumed for anything other than an african-american. So it is difficult not to be biased! No more biased than Hannity, Limbaugh, The Weekly Standard - we can go on.

As far as Christianity is concerned - it is a philosophical perversion that has functioned as a millstone around the necks of black people since we were brought here. And we will never get our act together as a people until we get rid of clergymen, Jesus and christianity.

Arthur Ward, Chicago, Illinois (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 11:45 AM)

when close to 95% of people of a long discriminated race support a candidate of the same race, when no such large plurality has been seen before for a candidate based on his/her positions it makes this (or a similar question) legitimate. And because of this country's history of racism, it is better to remove the emotional components from both sides by an AA reporter to ask it (though not required).
I.e. if 90% of women voted for Hillary, it would be a obvious conclusion that her gender was more important a consideration than her views, since no comparable disparity existed by women for a candidate previously.
However, the real question then becomes, WHY? And that is where journalists can examine the roots and the continuing issues that plague being black in america.
There are no easy answers, but we truly MUST look into this. Avoiding these discussions has not eased suspicion on those who believed race is the answer everywhere (from both sides). But, perhaps, we can now enter an era where we can examine what we do as groups, where it came from, and what we really want (ie. i do not believe 95%-one poll, i know, of african-americans WANT a black president as much as they WANT a system that is fair to all without regard to race. Hence, the overhwelming support for Bill Clinton, a white man believed to be fair, and now, Obama is that option from the choices. Add pride to the mix, and yes, a larger percentage of AA's can be expected to vote for him. That does not mean they are not fairly assessing him. Previous black candidates did not get this large a percentage of poll support from this group....so it IS about issues, wiht a little bit of other reasonable cause for support thrown in.
But, PLEASE. Let us continue to discuss this, without race talk being negative. We are different in many ways, but we are similar in more.

Josef, Montgomery, AL (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 11:57 AM)

All questions are fair game especially when it comes to questioning the integrity of ALL journalsits, not just the black ones.  How can a journalist expect me to believe they are objective when they identify themselves as a member of a race, ethnicity or polictical party?  Those of us granted with the gift of sight can obviously surmise the origin of their family tree.  What we need are the FACTS regarding the Candidates position on critical issues without the journalists pontificating their personal views on the subject. I can form my own opinions !!!

Lee,Precott Arizona (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:09 PM)

I concur with "Concerned, Il.                         I believe there are some journalists, whether they be black or white that do try to report the news fairly and unbiased, but there are some journalists that will say and do what they tld by those who control the purse strings; Yes, the Rich and Powerful, whose divide and conquer tactics has manage to cripple our government which is no longer for the people, but for the few. They turn race against race, cause confusion instead of understanding, and replaces hope with fear. If we could take greed and power not only out of politics, but out of the corporate board rooms, and out of our so called higher institutions of learning, Race would not be as big of an issue as it is today. That is not to say racism would'nt exist because some people would have a hard time letting it go regardless.

E Gray Sanford, Florida (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 1:03 PM)

How can anyone thing this question is irrelevant?

Someone asked, "When will this country finally be colorblind?" Probably never. But it will be far less important an issue when it is our eighth black president being voted in. Or our seventh Hispanic. Asian. Woman. Whenever a precedent is being set there is and will always be bias. For better or worse. If Barack Obama wins this election, I don't envy the time he will spend in the Whitehouse. Every move. Every vote and veto will be criticized and evaluated.

Anyone who likes to pretend there isn't still a racist undercurrent in this country needs to get off their high-horse. In one day I was called a N-loving traitor and a white-bred, racist b**** for voicing my moderate opinions on BOTH candidates weaknesses. That, my friends, is quite the juxtaposition. And while both of these instances lean toward extremist situations, they are figureheads of racial institutions on both sides of the fence that need to be diffused before we can exist in a "colorblind" society.

Anna, FL (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:18 PM)

To me it makes a statement saying, "We need to do everything we can to get a black person in the Oval office." The problem? They are only trying to put a puppet in office. He is a well dressed, well spoken balck man, but his credintials for being Chief of our great country? it sucks!. Everyone knows what you do with a puppet. You get tired of it and get rid of it. I would like to know why Obama's campaign doesn't publish all the threats he has had against him. He needs to remember. This country has some crazy people in it. He is riding a media bubble right now, thinking that he can make everyone love him. My only statement to that? If you love him, you are blind. To make him President of this great country, would be the same as YOU going to a doctor that only has 2 years of medicine under his belt. It would only take one (1) wrong move to scar you for life. That is what I equate the 3 a.m. call at the White House. (Who would you want to answer the phone?) Everyone needs to take a deep breath and wait until this coming Thursday, August 31, 2008. Watch the media, then make your choice. Don't be blind sided by talk for a serpents tongue.

CS, Owings Mills, MD (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:24 PM)

This was a silly question.  This election cycle is Way too long or the reporters need to find more stories about other topics.  Can a White cover a White? A Christian cover a Christian?  A Truck Driver cover a Truck driver?...yeah this is SILLY.  

H. Weaver (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:36 PM)

Black reporters are about as objective toward Obama as Fox News is towards Republicans.  View the report with skepticism.  Of course the same can be said about the entire mainstream news media.  In 2000 they gave Bush a free ride.  This time its Obama.  Where is the coverage about him lying about his membership on the Senate banking committee?  Guess a lie by their darling isn't important.

Ken, Beaufort, SC (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:37 PM)

Like majority have agreed, the question is dumb and unnecessary. I toatally agree with Fuzzy Q. Jones that the bigger question is can white journalist report on Obama fairly, like the poster of this ridiculous article Barbara Raab.
As for all the comments about the black journalists not answering the questions, it's obvious to me that the poster of this nonsense took posted their responses out of context.I guarantee these people were not asked the question "Can black reporters cover Obama fairly" and those were their immediate replies. She pulled selected statements that were made in regards to the topic and posted them as their answers.
So I ask again, can white reporters cover Obama fairly?

insulted, indianapolis, in (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:17 PM)

A recent poll showed 94% of blacks supporting Obama and 1% supporting McCain.  Someone please tell me of another group that has ever supported a candidate by such a margin........  It can't be done. That is why this question of black objectivity is being raised.  The poll confirms what everyone, including poor Bill Clinton, have been saying all along - that all blacks support Obama.  If this poll is even remotely correct then it can be safely assumed that all black reporters are Obama supporters.  The same assumption cannot be made of white reporters because whites never support one candidate in such numbers.  You might get 55% supporting one candidate, usually the GOP candidate.  However, since roughly half of whites vote for each party you could make an argument that about half of all white reporters would vote for one candidate or the other.  This is why there is a higher level of confidence that just because a reporter is white that they are not going to support one party or the other.  The same cannot be said of black reporters in this instance.  I think a more interesting story would be the danger of a voting bloc supporting one candidate in such monolithic numbers.  It has some scary and dangerous undertones to it that I suspect most reporters are too scared to dig into it due to fear of being called a racist.  

A Wright, Peachtree Corners GA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:39 PM)

I will have to chime in to EMPHASIZE what several people have already said.  In the racist world that we live in, we (African Americans) need to stop walking on eggshells and trying to please white folks.  We need to concentrate on pleasing God and then ourselves - if the others are pleased too - great.  I have YET to see consistent UNBIASED coverage by the MSM on Obama - YET.  Take a look back at the coverage: ABC folly of a debate, questioning his patriotism - he has to wear a flag an no one else does?!?, questioning his religious beliefs (do the others EVEN GO TO CHURCH) questioning Mrs. Obama's patriotism, and let's not forget the terrorist fist jab, and Obama's baby mama.  I could go on and on.  So if we are biased it will only LEVEL the playing field!!!

LisaHussein (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:43 PM)

To anotherperspective, thank you.  

It isn't a ridiculous question.  In fact, it is a very legitimate and important question.  

What we are witnessing is unique.  Black journalists reporting on a black candidate that will more than likely become our first black President.  How can they not be swept up in the fanfare and the excitement they feel?  You cannot ignore who they are covering and to ignore color in this case, is unfair.  Being white, I celebrate the history being made today!  

Do white candidates report fairly on white candidates?  Not always!  Journalists are human beings and as such, it is impossible not to bring human emotion and personal feelings in to their story.

Look back at white journalists of the past.  Walter Cronkite, David R Murrow, David Brinkley, the list goes on.  All of these men reported the news but you still saw a bit of their personal opinion creep into their reporting.

I don't know of any objective reporting today.  In our world of today, everyone has an opinion and as such, they express it either through words or actions.

Hopefully, in the future, it won't be an issue. But today, it is an issue for all of us to embrace.  Questions and all.

Susan (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:45 PM)

Do FOX/CBS/NBC/ABC News reporters  cover everyone fairly?   The premise of this blog is so ridiculous.  What factors would you use to measure bias?    

John Dough, Baltimore, Maryland (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:57 PM)

All in all, there may be some validity to the whole question. I started out wondering why black journalists were being asked if they could be professional. Why should color be a reason for questioning professionalism? But as I read through the comments, I could see some level of reality. The question is not so much that black journalists may be less than objective, or that female journalists were/are not objective on female candidates, or that privately neocon journalists were giving McCain a free ride, but how to deal with what seem to be accepted assumptions that an individual jounalist's gender, race, political alignment or whatever will automatically color what they write. After that needlessly long sentence, what we may want be concerned about are some of the current perceptions of journalism itself. The borderline between pundit and publicist has blurred beyond recognition. Legitimate candidates line up for the "bump" of a faux interview with an actor who performs a caricature of a biased commentator no one would ever confuse with a legitimate journalist. In sum, we live in a world where every journalist has to deal with a public that assumes they have a personal agenda, and does not assume that they are professional enough to rise above it.

Mike Carter, Gates, Oregon (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:02 PM)

I believe that the majority of black people are supporting Obama because he is intelligent, tolerant of other cultures and beliefs, eloquent speaker, and is more aligned with their beliefs. I believe we are not supporting McCain because he is not an eloquent speaker, he is prone to outbursts, and historically has not supported the issues that are importance to the black community.  Thus, it is a no-brainer that Obama would get the majority of the black vote.  I want a president I can be proud of and unfortunately McCain just doesn't fit that bill.  He is constantly mispeaking on issues he should be well versed on and openly admits that he is not informed on issues that a candidate running for president should be informed on.  Especially if he voted on the issues in the Senate.

Regina, St. Petersburg, FL (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:23 PM)

This is the most assinine article I have ever read.  She is stupid for even asking the question.  Probably a GOP Plant Sally...

Ty Seattle, Wash. (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:38 PM)

With the exception of Juan Williams, black journalists have shown unwavering bias in favor of Obama.  Similarly, black voters turned their backs on Hillary, who had always been in their corner, and is vastly better qualified.  It is irresponsible and short-sighted to put an inexperienced, unqualified candidate in the awesome position of President of the United States.  Obama can demonstrate his courage and leadership by NOMINATING HILLARY AT THE CONVENTION.  Perhaps, after two terms as HER VP,  he will have earned the trust of the voters.  But he is simply not electable in '08 and I am weary of hearing that our objects are his race!  

Caryl, Pembroke Pines, Florida (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:03 PM)

I find it quite interesting that this question would even come up.  I thought a journalist was to report the facts.  Personal opinions, subjection, etc. was to be kept out of the article.  I believe the question poised by the reporter is insulting.  To Real Deal and Others -  Don't apply your logic to everyone else.  My wife and several of my family members will not vote for Obama, nor will they vote for McCain.  They all have said they will vote for local candidates.  Don't believe that all Black folks vote in a block.  When the repubs have something to offer, they will get the Black vote.  Our state has had several GOP Governors, and the state is at least 75% democratic.  Black people vote their interest, whether its Democrats or Repub.  You can now see why the Black community did not overwhelmingly vote for Bush, this guy is a disaster as President.  And McCain gives off this aura, stiff, lying, and unconcerned.  So if Obama is getting as you say 90% of the Black vote, its because he is more convincing.

al johnson-646, Baltimore, Md (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:07 PM)

Its kind of funny how everyone starts there comment with "This question is ridiculous" then they answer it. Anyways I think this question is legit. Despite how disturbing it might be, its a question that should be answered with the utmost honesty, and not the answer that most people want to hear. Using the past as an excuse for white reporters doesn't really cut it. We can't condemn people of the past for the their biased or unbiased reporting, so lets look to the present. Its the first racially mixed human being ever to run, so in my opinion a lot of new and disturbing questions will arise. I am also mixed with white and black, and I feel anyone running for office or what not should be prepared..

Kristopher Lawrence, Parker, Co (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:14 PM)

The reason this is very relevant is because Obama received over 90% of the black vote against HRC. She has  a 25 year history of strong support for civil rights etc. etc. and her husband received over 90% of the black vote in two elections. Yet despite this record black voters overwhelmingly chose Obama purely on racial grounds since there were virtually no real policy differences between them

Len Obregon (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:47 PM)

There are no black "reporters" or "white reporters" or ""brown" yellow and red;  there are no longer any reporters ... ALL of them are editorial writers and slant every story, edit every picture, place every piece of a photo-op on air to fit their own agenda.
That agenda might be conservative, liberal, or whatever, but it is NEVER neutral! It's like asking Pelosi to cover the republican convention and as her to make comparisons with the democrat convention...surprise surprise what she would say!

Someone earlier said this question was dumb... I think it is not an oxymoron....just plain moronic.

Over 90% of the blacks are voting for Obama...and that's not racist...that is just appreciating the mans resume' and ability to do the job.  Give me a break!

Joe Zollo, Princeton, NJ (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:50 PM)

This question is obviously a non-issue. If reporters weren't able to set aside their personal views, whatever those views ma be, they wouldn't last long in their business. And for everyone wanting to kill whitey, remember that this question was asked by a black woman. Let's leave the race-baiting out of this and try to hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Sam, Sacto, CA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:04 PM)

The answer is NO.  But not because they are black and he is (half) black.  But because journalists can't cover anyone "fairly", as people are interpreting the question.  They can cover him objectively from their personal history and background complete with their opinions.
But that does not mean that they should not cover him.  White conservative reporters can't cover John McCain "fairly".  They can and should do their jobs as well as they can.  If they are reporting his activities, then that is what they should do.  If they are Editorializing (is that a real word?), then they should state their position clearly.

Steve Day (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:34 PM)

The question of whether or not Black journalists can report unbiased on Obama, should also carry a caveat, OF;;Can White journalists report unbiased for McCain. Either way the questions are ridiculous. Maybe the person posing the initial question is them self biased for even considering such a stupid "question".

Gary Ackerman Ocala, Fl (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:35 PM)

Of course black reporters and blacks in general are going to vote for a black candidate. It doen't matter if he's qualified or not..He's black and in their way of thinking that is all that matters. It has been proven time and time again.Look at Marian Berry in Washington, look at Jack Ellis in Macon,Ga. These two mayors were guilty of many criminal charges, but because the voting base was predominately black they kept getting voted back into office.(Because they were black) there was no positive reasons to vote for them. They were black..

Jim De. (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:37 PM)

I think the better question is can "white reporters" report on him without bias. They stalk him constantly looking for the rare gaffe, while Sen. McCain makes them daily and they miss them or ignore them because, they are so busy waiting for Sen. Obama to slip up. I also wish the white reporters would stop insinuating that the confidence that Sen. Obama shows, is his being presumptuous or even arrogant. African Americans can be confident without being "UPPITY".

LB, Newport News, VA (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:51 PM)

As a retired officer and a proud American that happens to be black; I agree that not one reporter answered the question. We all know that for the first time in our nations history we have the chance to elect our nations first President of color. I know Senator Obama Labels himsrlf as multiracial but in the eyes of so many Americans he is a Black man. I for one am tired of the press writting a clearly biased article about some one or something in this country and then hiding behind they are only being an objective journalist argument. I have never understood why they just can't say hey I just don't like this guy and the way he thinks. I for one am not a supporter of Senator Obama and I am not excited about John Mccain. I know that leadership is not just about ability, experience,and the ability to size up a situation and make the right choice. Leadership is a mixture of all of those traits and others.Quit worrying about how we as black Americans are being judged over how they report on a candidate because of their race; and start looking at the fact that no matter who is elected we will be making a choice that will directly impact this nation forever.

LTC Larry D. Jones Decatur, Al (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:56 PM)

"As for about 92% of blacks voting for Obama"
I just wanna know WHAT DA F the other  8 percent is thinking?!?! ;)
Asking the question is proof of how much blacks have internalized racism against THEMSELVES. Also for blacks, it apparently takes some effort to think of ourselves as levelheaded, reasonable, detached etc, etc. all the 'good' attributes we ascribe to Whitey McWhite.

Oh, and that loser that described Uncle Tom as the HERO of the book: You REALLY must be drinking the Kool-Aid, and did NOT get ANYthing about that book.

The Coloured European Observer (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:06 PM)

I must agree with the earlier comment, that it would be more to the point to ask if white journalists ARE (not would) report without bias against Obama. It has been demonstrated that many already show their racist flavoring in the editorialized reporting that we are now getting. The article titles and the cynical pundancy around every statement or movement of Obama is so obvious that Stevie Wonder can see it.

And with regard to a black woman posing the question, who do you think would lend more legitimacy to an undercover racist attack than to put "Ole Uncle Remus" out front? Conservative, corporate run news outlets have never had a problem finding a Clarence Thomas when they want to incite division within the black community. The only problem is that blacks fall for it. So, I encourage Black Journalist to keep on doing the fine job of representing balanced visual landscape as well as perspective. If white newscasters can report in a way that they feel appeals to their pro-white audiences, shouldn't it be at least as fair for blacks(when they get that rare, on camera moment) to throw a little weight to the other side of the issues and viewpoints?

SealTeam 0 (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:06 PM)

in 1960, did they ask this of Catholic reporters?

The Coloured European Observer (Sent Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:07 PM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

NBC NEWS IN THE BLOGOSPHERE

More Daily Nightly

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Categories:

RECENT STORIES FROM NIGHTLY NEWS

  • Nightly News section front

CONNECT WITH US

About the broadcast | Biographies

RSS is an easy way to get the news you want as it is updated even if you are not on MSNBC.com. More information about MSNBC.com's RSS feeds.

Subscribe to feed

Podcasting brings you audio and video from each weekday broadcast on your iPod or other portable MP3 player anytime, anywhere. More information about MSNBC.com's podcasts.

Subscribe to podcast

Sign-up for our daily e-mail newsletter. It offers a preview of the stories and special reports featured on each weekday broadcast.


Syndicate This Site

Add The Daily Nightly to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google

MSNBC Weblogs