Why would any journalist show up to "moderate" a debate so fraught with rules? There is next-to-nothing journalistic about it, from the prohibitions on follow-up questions to the entirely absurd restriction on questioner reaction shots.

Liz Cox Barrett, Columbia Journalism Review

Yesterday( Sep 6), I hoped that Tom Brokaw might do more with tonight’s debate than Gwen Ifill did with last Thursday’s (more in the way of pressing for answers to the questions being asked).

Today (Sep 7), I have less hope.

Among the rules for tonight’s “town hall-style” debate, agreed to by both campaigns “as part of a 31-page memorandum of understanding that leaked out this week,” a “document that is not made public, even by the Commission on Presidential Debates, clouding the transparency of this most important of public events” (this, the same Commission with the stated mission “to provide the best possible information to viewers and listeners”):

- The in-studio questioner must not deviate from his or her question and cannot ask a follow-up question. Their microphones will be turned off after they ask their questions.

- The moderator cannot ask a follow-up.

- The camera cannot show the reaction of the questioner.

More...

Related:

Citizens Want Debate Moderators to Challenge Candidate Spin, Free Press
John McCain's supporters seemed happy with the ground rules of the second presidential debate in Nashville. Barack Obama's supporters seemed happy with the results. By large margins, an online panel of more than 2,800 volunteers thought that Brokaw's decision not to fact-check the candidates or challenge their spin was a problem.