Media Matters

    This past Wednesday' s ninth Democratic Debate on NBC/MSNBC was not a debate. Neither was any of its predecessors. It's hard to believe this observation has not been previously noted because it's an obvious one.      When we think of a debate, we imagine a formal discussion with two opposing teams.  Debates are a respected, prestigious discipline, and anyone on a university debate team is considered likewise.        Other kinds of debates have influence as well. Consider the first TV political debate between Presidential candidates Kennedy and Nixon. Did these debates decide the outcome of the election? Specifically, did Kennedy's Presidential win owe its success to the TV presentation? Viewers watching the two men on TV declared that it did; radio listeners believed that Nixon had won. No doubt the difference between seeing images and  hearing words figured in these conclusions.      Images still hold weight, but it's really what candidates say ( cont

      This year's upcoming Oscar  on February 9 for BEST PICTURE is an especially intriguing one, particularly since two old-time respected directors, Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino, are in competition with each other. An absence of decades has preceded this "stand-off." Yet what difference does that make anyway? Maybe only to yours truly who always thought both filmmakers shared common traits, some obvious, some not. Scorsese's "The Irishmen" and Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" ( "Hollywood") help prove the point.      While I was writing my book on Scorsese several years ago, I kept searching for a consistent theme in the body of his works. True, I found  recurring motifs and subjects, but not one similar main idea emerged. However,  that changed when New York Times critic A.O. Scott pinpointed the essential  meaning in "The Irishmen" as  the inevitability of loss.       I'll go with that, ye