Networks disserve voters by culling primary debaters

There are some core essentials for choosing the leaders of a free society, one being the sturdy backbone of an informed electorate. Any republic or democracy will fail with clueless or apathetic voters.

Informing citizenry is a shared responsibility. Individuals have to seek out political information, and the media must report on the workings of government, and elections.

Given the media's charge to cover government, I was dismayed to read on The New York Times political blog, The Caucus, that some presidential candidates will be barred from televised debates in New Hampshire.

ABC News and Fox News decided to exclude from debates this weekend candidates deemed unelectable. David Chalian, the ABC News political director, told The New York Times that the network wants a production that showcases the "best conversation and debate between the candidates who really have a chance to become the nominee."

At least Chalian offered an explanation, however weak. Fox News never returned calls and e-mails sent by a number of news outlets.

So what criteria have ABC News and Fox News relied on to determine the electability of the next presidential contenders?

Fox News has invited what it must consider the five top contenders for the Republican nomination for a Sunday night debate. Left out are Reps. Ron Paul, R-Texas, and Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.

How can Fox News exclude Paul and include former Sen. Fred Thompson when Paul has more support in New Hampshire?

The limits employed by ABC News for its Republican and Democrat debates Saturday night are more bizarre. The network is letting candidates debate only if they finished in the top four of Thursday night's Iowa caucuses or if the candidates' support reaches 5 percent in national or New Hampshire polls.

ABC journalists have decided that the nation and New Hampshire will hear only from Iowa's favorite politicians. This Iowa benchmark coupled with the 5-percent cutoff will probably exclude serious candidates. It is questionable that Sens. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Joseph Biden, D-Del., can meet the threshold.

Fox News and ABC News do voters a disservice by excluding serious candidates. Biden and Dodd probably will not win their party's nomination, or even win the New Hampshire primary. But they are statesmen who have the potential to influence the debate by forcing front-runners to speak about uncomfortable issues.

Paul should be allowed a seat on the GOP stage. His Libertarian message resonates in New Hampshire. The Texan also brings some glaring differences, like his opposition to the war, to a Republican stage dominated by fear-based foreign policy and immigration reform.

What might seem to journalists like a campaign that started during the Cold War is just heating up for the public. The first caucus was Thursday night, and the first primary is Tuesday. Many voters are still formulating their opinions about the candidates.

ABC News and Fox News are denying voters vital information by giving the big-moneyed candidates a platform to crow from. The networks' actions damage credibility with viewers and voters.

One reader of The Caucus wrote, "Never again will I believe an established media outlet!"

I would not paint with such broad strokes, but what Fox News and ABC News have done worries me. The networks have managed to create doubts about their election coverage.

At this early stage of the campaign, voters need to hear from all the candidates. The media do democracy a disservice by tarnishing their role as facilitator.

Ryan Blethen's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is rblethen@seattletimes.com; for a podcast Q&A with the author, go to Opinion at seattletimes.com