Columnist Jeff German: Candidates out-Fox Channel 10

Saturday, Sept. 28, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.

TRADITIONALLY, the moderator of KLVX Channel 10's "Nevada Week in Review" sits on a hot seat.

Balancing the egos of local journalists and public officials invited to the weekly news roundup puts enormous pressure on the host.

Getting the right mix of journalists who can be civil to one another while discussing the week's hot topics sometimes can be a Herculean task.

The pressure is enhanced at Channel 10 because the station isn't a private news organization.

Channel 10 is operated by the Clark County School District and, as part of the Public Broadcasting System, it relies a great deal on taxpayer funding to keep afloat.

No wonder there's been a long list of Week in Review moderators during the show's recent history.

Current host Mitch Fox probably has lasted the longest.

But even Fox is starting to buckle under the heat.

Tonight's debate between Rep. John Ensign and his opponent, state Sen. Bob Coffin, D-Las Vegas, is one example.

After lengthy negotiations, Fox bowed to the wishes of Ensign and Coffin and put together a panel of questioners that includes two reporters who don't follow the race and a local columnist, Jon Ralston, who has a conflict of interest covering the campaign.

Ensign, it turns out, had nixed at least two political writers his staff conceded were likely to ask him tough questions.

That Fox would cave in to the freshman congressman isn't surprising. He has done it before.

The public broadcasting is threatened these days by the Republican-controlled Congress, which wants to cut its funding. Ensign has a vote in that debate.

As for Ensign, it's easy to understand why he would approve of taking questions from two panelists who don't follow his race. They won't be as familiar with the issues that have generated the most controversy for Ensign.

And though Fox has his blinders on, most can see why Ensign would also want Ralston on the panel. Ralston's family is closely tied to Ensign's rise to political power.

Furthermore, Ralston, as reported in Las Vegas City Life newspaper, recently got into a public tiff with Coffin. Some say the emotional columnist threatened Coffin's political career.

This past week, in response to last Sunday's column that questioned the process of allowing candidates to dictate the makeup of debate panels, Fox sent a letter to the editor of the SUN defending his actions. The letter was printed Friday.

The Channel 10 moderator is correct in saying that Coffin never objected to Ralston's presence on the panel. Coffin is no dummy.

He knows that by refusing to appear with Ralston, it will look as if he's afraid to stand toe-to-toe with his nemesis. Worse, he'll risk offending the writer, who still has plenty of time in the campaign to toss unfriendly barbs his way.

As for the rest of Fox's letter, he chose to defend his selections and heap praise on the panelists who passed candidate inspection instead of explaining why he allowed himself to be used.

Nowhere did Fox acknowledge how tough it was to balance the interests of the candidates, who are trying to make themselves look good on camera, against the public's right to an independent political forum.

For that reason, the words of ex-Republican National Committee Chairman Frank Fahrenkopf, who now co-chairs the Commission on Presidential Debates in Washington, that were printed last week bear repeating.

"I don't think the candidates should be allowed to pick who it is from the media who questions them," Fahrenkopf said. "You have to have someone who will have no compunction about asking the tough, hard questions the public has a right to know."

As a good example, all you have to do is go back a few years to the days when Bob Stoldal ran the KLAS Channel 8 news department. In those days, Channel 8 was far ahead in the ratings war with its competitors. And there was a reason for it.

Stoldal, regarded as the dean of news directors at the time, understood Fahrenkopf's words. He knew the value of maintaining the integrity of his news organization.

When it came time for debates, one veteran political consultant recalls, Stoldal never allowed the candidates to tell him which journalists would ask the questions.

"He gave you the rules. He told you who was going to be on the panel and if you didn't like it, you weren't on the debate," the insider says.

Fox could learn a few things from Stoldal.

He should uphold the principles of his profession and stand up to the candidates, rather than appease them.

Viewers will get more out of the debate if they know that those putting it on haven't compromised their journalistic principles.

Hopefully, there'll be a lively discussion of the issues tonight, for Fox's sake, and more important, the public's.

It's not easy being on the hot seat, is it Mitch?

It's five weeks to go before the general election and Republicans still don't have their priorities straight.

Nevada Republican Party Chairman John Mason stunned party regulars Friday when he sent out a bizarre news release taking a cheap shot at former GOP leader Marilyn Gubler.

Mason released an official list of party spokespersons that excluded Gubler, who's now a political consultant.

Gubler has never passed herself off as a party spokeswoman, though as a member of the state and county central committees, she could.

This campaign season, in her capacity as a former state chairwoman, Gubler has been called upon by KVBC Channel 3 and KLVX Channel 10 to serve as an on-air analyst.

She was on Channel 10 as recently as Sept. 20.

That's when jealously by some within the party apparently set in.

In his statement, Mason said: "Ms. Gubler is neither a spokesperson for the Republican Party nor, in my opinion, a Republican activist."

His words caused an uproar among party regulars, many of whom are Gubler's friends.

Gubler says she's surprised at Mason's attempt to restrict her free speech.

"I thought it was OK for Republicans to speak their minds," she says.

Many were at a loss to explain why Mason tried to embarrass one of his predecessors and restrict the media's access to the party.

But some speculated that whacky GOP Finance Chairman George Harris may have had something to do with it.

Gubler's television appearances seem to have taken the limelight away from Harris, who likes to run his mouth off on the airwaves.

archive