Inside PBS Blog

The Democrats finally settled on a presidential nominee this week, so you know what that means.

It's on.

Barack vs. John.

The Obamanator vs. The McCainiac.

Bring it!

The PBS stations in each candidate's home state are already in general election swing, paying close attention to the local guy's actions.

Obama's decision to resign from his church is being debated on the message board for WTTW in Chicago.

One viewer laments the senator's choice.

"I have known Barack Obama since he first came to Chicago as a community organizer, and I have worked as a community organizer with him throughout his career, and he does not deserve this, but for the sake of the needed change in the presidency, he must make this sacrifice," writes Mark S. Allen, who identifies himself as associate editor of the South Street Journal.

Meanwhile, the McCain campaign's decision to close a fundraiser featuring President Bush was the subject of discussion on a recent edition of "Horizon," a journalists' roundtable show that airs on KAET, a PBS station operated by Arizona State University.

As Mary Jo Pitzl of the Arizona Republic asks during the show: "You wonder in Arizona, where this probably got the most play, how much is that going to hurt McCain in his home state?"

(Pitzl's comments come at 16 minutes and 10 seconds into the discussion, which can be seen online here.)

With so much media attention certain to be devoted to the candidates between now and November, what role do you think public media--which is to say, non-commercial operations such as PBS, National Public Radio and others--should play in the campaign coverage?

Do you trust journalists of public media outlets any more (or less) than others?

As a resident of your local community, do you find political coverage by journalists in your state or city more valuable than reports aimed at a national audience?

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below.