After listening to Curtis Wilkie, Tom Oliphant, and Matt Storin at a discussion at the Overby Center for Southern Journalism and Politics this morning, I was impressed by their knowledge of presidential debates. All three of them have covered many debates since 1988, which is when the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) took over the organization of debates from the League of Women Voters.

I cannot wait to see how the media will cover this monumental event at the University of Mississippi in relation to our school’s rich and unique history. I am curious to see how the media will cover the issues of the debate as well. In the discussion this morning, Oliphant discussed how the debate could be either a news event or metaphor of the whole campaign. I believe what he meant by this was that the media could cover the debate in such a way that it is clear, straight news, such as covering the topics discussed and analyzing the effects of the candidates words, or they could cover it in such a way that they find two to three key points that serve as a metaphor to the themes of each candidates campaign.

Oliphant explained how Obama and McCain are probably working with their aides right now to develop short but strong one-liners for the debate that can serve as sound bites for the media. The key phrases that come out of the politicians mouths that stick with us and that make such strong points are examples of these campaign metaphors. Storin said that so far from this campaign the only real metaphor used was Sarah Palin’s “The only difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull is lipstick” line.

I have to admit that I am a little let down to know that probably many of the greatest lines from politicians in history are carefully crafted and not spontaneous. However, I am anxious to see what these one-line messages will be that the Obama and McCain camps create for this debate.

Overall, I am just curious to see how and why certain news stations will cover the debate. Should they cover the debate simply by sharing what happened and the effects that it may have or should they cover the metaphors? To me, metaphors seem to be the one-liners that can make people hate a candidate or really support a candidate, but in this era of political campaigns these metaphors seem to be what sells and what is most entertaining. I just hope that the media will cover this historical event in the right context that can serve the public in the best way.

Oliphant, who has been working for the Boston Globe since 1968, left the audience with one last piece of advice. He advised us not to watch the big news channels after the debate, because they would greatly influence our opinion. He urged us to watch it with a group of friends and then form our own opinions. Hearing this from a journalist made me wonder if the media will cover the debate in the best and most objective way?