Something I\u2019m calling \u201cidentity journalism\u201d has taken over the Democratic primary debates in 2019. Watching the third in a series of who-knows-how-many \u201cdebates\u201d among the many contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, I became aware of something disturbing: The debate moderators\u2014on-air anchors and reporters from ABC News\u2014sorted themselves out into ethnicities and based many of their questions on those identities. Here\u2019s how it played out:<\/p>\n

The four moderators were ABC\u200b News\u2019\u200b George Stephanopoulos, David Muir, Linsey Davis and Univision\u2019s Jorge Ramos. As the debate [and I use that term very loosely] progressed, Linsey Davis\u2014the African-American moderator\u2014asked the \u201cblack questions\u201d about racial inequality, the rise of white supremacy, and institutional racism in America. Jorge Ramos, the Latino moderator, asked the \u201cHispanic\u201d questions about the candidates\u2019 views on immigration and on Trump\u2019s actions at the U.S.-Mexico border. Stephanopoulous and Muir asked questions that were more \u201cuniversal,\u201d\u2014the subtext of which is that white is the default, the standard, the non-ethnic.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know if they talked this strategy over when planning the debate, but it makes me uncomfortable to realize that, apparently, only the black moderator can ask the racial questions, only the Latino moderator can ask the immigration questions, and only the white moderators can ask the \u201cnon-ethnic\u201d questions. It\u2019s journalistic stereotyping, and it makes me queasy to watch it.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a similar stratification among candidates and the questions they\u2019re expected to address. Kamala Harris and Corey Booker, almost inevitably through the debates so far, get the racial inequality questions first. They\u2019re people of color so, of course, in the minds of the moderators, they\u2019re the experts on these issues. I\u2019d venture to say that Elizabeth Warren has not been asked very many questions about racial relations, but I\u2019d have to review all of the transcripts to confirm that assertion.<\/p>\n

Beto O\u2019Rourke and Julian Castro get the immigration questions. Pete Buttigieg gets the \u201cLGBTQ\u201d questions\u2014and gets a special dispensation to answer \u201cracial\u201d questions because of unrest in South Bend, Indiana, where he is mayor. Sanders, Warren, Biden and Klobuchar get the \u201cwhite people\u201d questions about healthcare, foreign affairs and taxes, and are left on the sidelines of the \u201cethnic\u201d issues. I\u2019d like to hear more from them about their views on immigration, gun violence and racial issues, and I\u2019d like to hear more from the others about their views on the more \u201cgeneric\u201d issues. That may happen, but only, I\u2019m afraid when the field has narrowed considerably.<\/p>\n

I want to note, also, that the candidates themselves have aided and abetted this stereotyping by staking out territories that distinguish them from the unwieldy pack of nearly two dozen people who initially sought the Democratic nomination. Kirsten Gillibrand billed herself as the feminist candidate. Tulsi Gabbard was the more conservative military veteran candidate. Tim Ryan identified himself as the working person\u2019s champion. Jay Inslee, John Hickenlooper and Steve Bullock positioned themselves as the get-it-done governors.<\/p>\n

But as the field has begun to shrink, not only are candidates disappearing, so is attention to their self-proclaimed territories fading. With no governor on the debate stage, moderators don\u2019t ask questions about the nuts-and-bolts of governing. In the absence of Kirsten Gillibrand, moderators at the third debate didn\u2019t ask a single question about reproductive rights or Me-Too issues. Unions? Workers? The middle class? No Tim Ryan, so no working-guy questions. And if you\u2019d like to hear candidates\u2019 views on what to do about poverty in America\u2019s \u201cbooming economy,\u201d fuhgettaboutit: There\u2019s not a \u201cpoor person\u2019s candidate\u201d in sight, so who\u2019s going to bother to ask about that?<\/p>\n

We are in desperate times. We need real political debate\u2014not the made-for-tv, 60-second answer, try-to-spark-a-feud, issue-stereotyped game show that we are currently seeing.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Something I\u2019m calling \u201cidentity journalism\u201d has taken over the Democratic primary debates in 2019. Watching the third in a series of who-knows-how-many \u201cdebates\u201d among<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":40414,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3027,3244,715,77],"tags":[1269,3453,1755,2055],"yoast_head":"\n