My answer is no.
An edited version of a comment I posted earlier in the Palin v. Biden thread:
As for failure to ‘vet’ moderators — that is completely backwards. A public official (legislator, judge, whatever) that sits in on a decision that directly effects his own interests cannot avoid the consequences merely by saying nobody asked.
Do we really hold our media to such a low standard that it is okay for them to have a conflict of interest and not put the burden on them to be up front about it?
In my opinion, it is perfectly reasonable for the McCain camp not to know about the book until now. There is a presumption, right or wrong, that ‘journalists’ will not have a blatant conflict of interest. The ‘right or wrong’ refers to whether the presumption is reasonable — I don’t think there would be much argument to the proposition that we ought, in a better world, to be able to take the neutrality of self-proclaimed impartial journalists at their word.
As a practical matter, yes, this election has shown that the media cannot be trusted at even the most basic level. I don’t think it has ever been this bad (the hypocrisy of claiming neutrality, not the partisanship itself), and I don’t think the McCain camp should be criticized for not doing a background check on each moderator.
Frankly, all the ‘McCain didn’t vet again’ hysteria aside, I think that this coming out now actually helps in two ways: first, Ifill will have to be on her best behavior because any bias she shows will now be a story in itself, and second, the already-low expectations for Palin’s performance get even lower with a known-biased moderator.
